BUSINESS AND CORPORATE LAW

Table of Contents

Question 1. 5

Issue. 5

Rule. 5

Analysis. 5

Conclusion. 5

Question 2. 6

a)     Ground of claim.. 6

Issue. 6

Rule. 6

Analysis. 6

Conclusion. 6

b)         Situation After Taking Service. 7

Question 3. 8

Issue. 8

Rules. 8

Analysis. 8

Conclusion. 9

Question 4. 10

Issue. 10

Rule. 10

Analysis. 10

Conclusion. 11

Question 5. 12

Issue. 12

Rules. 12

Analysis. 12

Conclusion. 12

Question 6. 13

Issue. 13

Rule. 13

Analysis. 13

Conclusion. 14

Reference List 15

Question 1

Issue

Several patients have been taken service from XYZ manufacturing for replacement of their hip bones. Patients face severe pain within 2 months of surgery and it has been proven that patients face pain due to manufacturing issues. 

Rule

Analysis

The Law of Tort implies when a party does legal wrong to another party. A tortfeasor is a party who faces legal wrong by committing acts of another party[2]. Tortfeasor can claim an award of damages for a wrongful act. The case of XYZ indicates that it is a case of Injurious Falsehood Tort. XYZ companies give wrong information and cheap quality products to their clients or patients. On other hand, their product has been damaged which creates pain and problems for customers for which they take money. It can be stated that several people face injuries and pain due to the falsehood of XYZ, for this reason, the Law of Negligence and Limitation of Liability Act 2008 can be implemented.

Conclusion

XYZ provided false information and their manufacturing process was not appropriate for this reason people or patients face injury and pain; based on this law of Trot can be applicable.

Question 2

a)    Ground of claim

Issue

Lion's Mane Barber Shop promotes their saloons through flyers and they stated that they provide style cuts and shaves for $12. Karl was attracted by the price and went to the shop; he found that the quoted amount was misprinted and the actual amount was $22.

Rule

Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (Cth)) (ACL)can be implemented for this case scenario. This law prevents organisations from fake, false, misrepresented advertisement and rights of consumers discussed in this law in case of this type of advertisement[3].

Analysis

According to case study, it can clearly be stated that Barber Shop misrepresent consumers to attract their shop by lowering the price. They did not give any reasonable explanation for the misrepresentation of price. In addition, the manager tries to convince them that their price is lower than other barber shows. They try to convince the customer to take service more than quoted price and represent that their price is still lower than others[4].

Conclusion

According to a law he has grounds to not claim service at $12 because the price is higher than advertising stated by the Barbershop. He can file a complaint into the regulatory system and they can help to get his rights.

b)    Situation After Taking Service

Situation can be different in case he did not know about the price and service team provide service. According to a law they promoted their product for $12 and they did not mention mistakes in their flyer. For this reason, they cannot be claimed for full money or $22 for service. Karl came to the shop based on an advertisement and the service team did not rectify their price, instead of knowing that the price was higher than quoted. Karl can file a complaint about misrepresentation and fraud both on the name of the barbershop because they misrepresent at first and try to hide the truth about the price.

Question 3

Issue

Miguel is a 16-year-old mechanic who represents himself as 20 years old to neighbour Jono. he asked for a $3,000 loan stating that he has a good income and his age is 20. After payment of the first instalment, he refused to pay the rest instalment. Jono finds that Miguel represents himself as an adult whereas he is a minor to deceit himself.

Rules

Misrepresentation Act, 1972 can be used in terms of this because Miguel entered a contract by misrepresenting himself as an adult[5]. In addition, he deceit Jono for this reason he can sue Miguel under the Crimes Act, 1958 because deceit is a criminal offence according to the court of Australia.

Analysis

Miguel is a minor according to law because his age is under 18. He cannot enter a contract because law does not permit this. According to the case study they entered a contract that was illegal and he misrepresented himself in front of Jono. He takes financial benefit from Jono as a loan and he refuses to repay the loan as an excuse that he is a minor. According to law, a person cannot sue a minor for breaching a contract. There is some provision in law for minors when they intentionally deceit someone and hide behind the veil of a minor. According to the Commonwealth Law of Criminal Justice minors whose age is under 10 they cannot be punished for criminal activities.

Children who are between the ages of 10 to 14 can be punished under the law in case they are aware that they are doing wrong activities. Above this age can be punished in case he is found guilty[6]. In this case, it can be highlighted that Miguel wilfully misrepresented himself as an adult for this reason he can be punished by law though whether he can pay the rest of 2000 AUD to Jono depends on the court. According to the recommendation of the Australian Law Reform Commission, those under 16 cannot be liable for civil liability and based on this recommendation Miguel can get punishment. On the other hand, judges can make decisions about age and punishment for other laws and in this case Misrepresentation Act, 1972.

Conclusion

Jono can be successful in his action in tort for deceit against Miguel. Law has provisions to punish minors who wilfully do criminal activities.

Question 4

Issue

Charles purchased a Harley Davidson motorbike from Kenny's Motorcycle. Kenny's Motorcycle stated that the bike was made in 2008 and it runs 12,000 Kilometres. Charles took his bike to an authorised service centre for servicing after a few months of purchase. A repair person told him that the bike was made in 2004 and the bike ran more than 12,000 Kilometres at the time of purchase. According to the investigation of Charles, based on the repairman's information, he found that he paid more than 4,000 AUD extra for the bike. He can act against Kenny's Motorcycle under contract law.

Rule

Contract Law will be effective in this case because transactions between them create a contract. Diesel or terms and conditions in a contract must be fulfilled by both parties. Consideration must be fulfilled according to contract otherwise it can be stated as a breach of contract[7].

Analysis

Charles went to purchase a pre-owned motorcycle from Kenny's motorcycle. He asked about the details and based on the details provided by Kenny's they determined the price. Price of a motorcycle can be different in case the details of the motorcycle are something else. They make an agreement that Kenny sold his Harley Davidson Softail Model which was made up of 2008 and does not run more than 12,000 Kilometres which to was condition of contract in consideration Charles has been paid amount to Kenny's. According to the information repair person, several details that Kenny provided were false and according to the contract, Kenny did not perform his job according to contract because he did not sell product according to an agreement[8]. On other hand, Charles performs his side of duty for this reason he can sue Kenny's Motorcycle for breach of contract. In addition, Charles can sue him for misrepresentation for entering a contract. Charles entered a contract due to false representation of Kenny's and based on this false representation he can apply for termination of contract and ask for refund or compensation.

Conclusion

Charles can act by using two methods he can sue for breaching contract as agreements because one party already performed the other party did not perform appropriately or accordingly terms of the agreement. In addition, he can sue them for false representation and termination of a contract. 

Question 5

Issue

Samantha wanted to buy a unit in Kogarah for this reason she planned to sell her unit, Oatley. She needs to pay the full amount of the purchase price of Kogarah in 120 days and for failure to sell the Oatley unit, she needs to take a loan.

Rules

Contract Law of Australia can be applicable in this case because Samantha wants to act for her seller according to the rules of contract law.

Analysis

According to the case, study sales agreed to purchase the unit of Oatley from Samantha. In this contract two parties enter by their willingness and consideration is present on contract. Due to this reason, this contract is legally bound and others must perform or purchase the property of Samantha on the mentioned date [9]. Samantha was ready to perform according to law for this reason she can sue her seller.

Conclusion

Samantha can sue her seller for breaching contract according to contract law.

Question 6

Issue

Octagon Supplements is an Organic food product-based company that wanted to invent a new business. They pass a resolution to invest in the new company. Before passing resolutions, they take advice from management consultants and based on that report they make decisions about investment. The company has a huge loss after; eight months of business and they cannot earn their target profit from the business. Shareholders blame those directors are responsible for this loss.

Rule

Corporations Act 2001 provides duties and rules for directors and they must possess their duty for the betterment of company and society. Noncompliance with these duties can create trouble for them[10].

Analysis

The case study indicated that directors take decisions for investment based on reports of management consultants. It cannot be stated that they take this decision without any judgement and thinking or for their interest. Directors have some duties according to law and they must comply with that. One of the important duties is "duties with diligence and care"; it implies that directors need to make decisions based on rational thinking and the best interest of the company[11]. They must check all the factors before making any decision and in this case, they just blindly believe the data of the management consultant. They did not further check or cross-check data and facts. Cross-checking or using their intelligence can help to evaluate that this investment may not be appropriate for the company. They do not act regarding this rather they invest money on that. Their intention was correct though they do not fulfil their duty according to law. Proper diligence and evaluation of facts can help to eliminate this risk.

Conclusion

Directors are responsible for this case because they do not use their diligence in this investment. They just believe the facts stated by consultant management which create trouble for them and directors do not complete their duty.

Reference List

Australian Contract Law, Association of Corporate Council (Web Page, 14 June 2021) <https://www.acc.com/resource-library/australian-contract-law#:~:text=Australian%20contract%20law%20is%20not,law%2C%20overseen%20by%20the%20courts.&text=a%20party's%20rights.-,The%20basic%20principle%20of%20Australian%20contract%20law%20is%20freedom%20of,strike%20whatever%20bargain%20they%20choose>

Australian Contract Law, Julie Clarke (Web Page, 14 June 2021) <https://www.australiancontractlaw.info/>

Bianchi, L. (2018). Consumer law: Changes to Australian consumer law: Key benefits for vulnerable consumers. LSJ: Law Society of NSW Journal, (50), 71-73.

Contract Law in Australia - 2019

, Rule of Law (Web Page, 14 June 2021) <https://www.ruleoflaw.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/2019-03-21-Contract-Law-Final-Resource.pdf>

CORPORATIONS ACT 2001, Austlii education (Web Page, 14 June 2021) <http://www5.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/ca2001172/>

Corporations Act 2001, Federal Register of Legislation (Web Page, 14 June 2021) <https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/C2017C00328>

Exemption or defence for children and young persons, Australian Law Reform Commission (Web Page, 14 June 2021) <https://www.alrc.gov.au/publication/serious-invasions-of-privacy-in-the-digital-era-alrc-report-123/11-defences-and-exemptions/exemption-or-defence-for-children-and-young-persons/>

Law of Negligence and Limitation of Liability Act 2008 (NI), Federal Register of Legislation (Web Page, 14 June 2021)  <https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/C2016Q00058/Html/Text#_Toc197935191>

Milnes, M. (2019). Consumer law: ACCC gains momentum in its push for higher consumer law penalties. LSJ: Law Society of NSW Journal, (61), 84-85.

MISREPRESENTATION ACT 1972 - SECT 7, South Australian current acts <http://classic.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/sa/consol_act/ma1972224/s7.html>

What is a tort? Australian Law Reform Commission (Web Page, 14 June 2021) <https://www.alrc.gov.au/publication/traditional-rights-and-freedoms-encroachments-by-commonwealth-laws-alrc-interim-report-127/17-immunity-from-civil-liability/what-is-a-tort/>