BUAD-209-D11-31318.202030 Business Law
Fall Term 2020
Assignment 1 Guidelines and Instructions
ASSIGNMENT 1 GUIDELINES
This assignment consists of two elements:
•
Your responses to 10 concept, theory and practice questions (as listed below)
taken from Chapters 1 to 9 in the text; and
•
Your responses to 5 questions relating to case-based questions (as listed below)
taken from Chapters 1 to 9 in the text.
This assignment will require you to submit a formal report of your responses to the
questions as a Word document submitted through the Assignment 1 Turn It In drop box
on the course Moodle site. Do not repeat the questions in your submission but make
sure that you number your responses consistent with the assignment.
There is no formal minimum or maximum length for your reports but you should expect
that a minimally satisfactory response for each question will be at least 200 words and at
least 300 words for each case-based question. You may exceed this minimum but a
minimally satisfactory response is not likely to be less than the minimums stated above.
Make sure you reference any external sources you use in your responses.
Submissions that are excellent and earn a grade of 80 and higher will have no errors of
grammar, spelling, citation, referencing, or writing style. They will exhibit an appropriate
level of professionalism in terms of their formatting and they will have evidence of
secondary research to support the responses. The responses will cover all aspects of
what is stipulated as required in each question and consistent with the grading rubric
below. Generally, submissions at this level are 4,000 words or higher.
Submissions that are very good and earn a grade between 70 and 79 will have some
errors of grammar, spelling, citation, referencing and some issues with writing style and
clarity of expression. They will also not demonstrate a high level of secondary research
to support responses and they will be consistent with the grading rubric below.
Submissions that are satisfactory and earn a grade of 50 to 69 will have significant
examples of spelling, grammar and writing style errors and only respond to the questions
in a perfunctory manner. They will be consistent with the grading rubric below.
Submissions that are unsatisfactory and earn less than 50 will have serious issues with
all of the elements discussed above. Responses that are unintelligible will receive a
grade of 0. Again, they will be consistent with the grading rubric below.
ELEMENTS
Issue identifies by
name the area/s of
law that is relevant to
Unsatisfactory (0-49)
Neither the relevant
area(s) of law nor the
legal problems that
Satisfactory (50-69)
The area of law is
correctly identified
but the statement
Very Good (70-79)
The area of law and
the legal problem(s)
to be addressed are
Excellent (80-100)
The area of law and
the legal problem(s)
to be addressed are
DE 209 F20 Assignment 1 Guidelines and Instructions (revised August 2020)
the problem question
and clearly describes
the legal problem that
must be addressed.
need to be addressed
are identified with
precision.
Rules of Law
No relevant legal
principles have been
identified with
precision.
states the relevant
legal principles. The
source of authority
will be a statute, case
law or a combination
of both.
Analysis consider
each legal principle
identified in the Rules
section and explains
its relevance to the
facts. It states how
each principle can be
applied/distinguished
to support logical
arguments about how
the Issue(s) will be
resolved.
Decision is stated
and provides an
overview of how the
arguments in the
Analysis section
address the Issue(s).
Professionalism
The submission is
clear, concise, and
precise. It employs
proper sentences and
carefully crafted
paragraphs. The
grammar, spelling
and punctuation are
correct.
does not clearly
describe the legal
problem(s) that need
to be addressed.
Some identification of
relevant legal
principles. In the
Moot Project, the
correct source(s) of
authority have not
been cited
accurately, or at all.
The discussion
considers some of
the relevant legal
principles but does
not effectively apply
those principles to
the key facts to
support logical
arguments about how
the Issue(s) will be
resolved.
identified but the
description of the
problem(s) is unclear
or incomplete.
All or most of the
relevant legal
principles are stated,
but the explanation of
the principles is
unclear or incomplete
identified clearly and
completely.
The discussion
considers the
application of most of
the relevant legal
principles to the key
facts but the
arguments are not all
clear, and some are
incomplete.
The discussion is a
clear, comprehensive
analysis of the
relevant legal
principles and their
application to the
facts. It supports
logical arguments
about how the
Issue(s) will be
resolved.
The Decision is not
stated or is not
supported
adequately.
The Decision is
clearly stated. It is
supported by some of
the arguments but
does not adequately
explain how they
address the Issue(s).
The submission
contains numerous
grammar, spelling,
and punctuation
errors. The
reader/listener is
unlikely to
understand much of
the material that is
presented.
The submission is
marred by grammar,
spelling, and
punctuation errors.
The reader/listener
must work hard to
understand the
material presented.
The Decision is
clearly stated. It is
supported by most of
the arguments but
the explanation of
how those arguments
address the Issue(s)
is unclear/incomplete.
The submission
contains some
grammar, spelling,
and punctuation
errors. While it may
not be a joy to read,
or to hear, it is easy
to follow.
The Decision is
clearly stated. It is
well supported by
arguments in the
Analysis section and
clearly explains how
those arguments
address the Issue(s).
The submission
employs correct
grammar, spelling,
and punctuation. It is
clear, concise and
precise. It is a joy to
read, or to hear.
The discussion of the
facts does not refer to
any relevant legal
principles, or does so
inadequately.
All relevant legal
principles are clearly
explained. In the
Moot Project, all
correct sources of
authority are given.
Responses to questions, as mentioned above, will require some level of secondary
research to support answers. Where you use published material not contained in the
text, you must cite it and reference it as you would in any other report using APA
referencing and citation style. Where you use personal knowledge or experiences, no
reference is necessary but you must make it clear that this is the source. Where you
refer to material from the text, it is acceptable to simply provide a page reference in
parentheses. Be very careful not to plagiarize the text, ie, do not to use the exact
wording of the text to respond to questions but if you do or if you paraphrase the text,
you must cite them properly in accordance with APA citation guidelines.
This assignment is worth 30 final marks in the course. Each of the 10 concept, theory
and practice questions is worth 10 marks. Each of the 5 case-based questions is worth
20 marks. The exam is out of 200 and weighted at 30% of the final course grade.
Responses will be assessed on their comprehensiveness, ie, the first four elements of
the rubric (80%) and professionalism (20% - grammar, spelling and writing style).
2
3
DE 209 F20 Assignment 1 Guidelines and Instructions (revised August 2020)
ASSIGNMENT 1 INSTRUCTIONS
Submit a report containing your responses to the following questions and case
discussion questions based on Chapters 1 through 9 of the text by the deadline
published in the Assignment Schedule. Your report must be submitted as a Word
document through the Assignment 1 Turn It In drop box on the Moodle course site. Do
not submit PDF’s.
Questions:
Respond to the specific questions asked below and ensure that you include in your
responses, discussion of the elements in the grading rubric.
1. Explain the different ways in which a lawyer may calculate the legal fees to charge a
client and provide examples of when each might be used. Which way is used most
often? What can a client do when the lawyer’s fees are disputed?
2. Explain the role of human rights tribunals in Canada. Identify their powers and the
types of sanctions and remedies they can impose. Use examples to illustrate your
discussion.
3. Discuss any limitations on the application of the Canadian Charter of Rights and
Freedoms. Be specific in identifying the major limitations of the Charter.
4. Using the principles of stare decisis, explain how judges determine whether or not
they are bound by another judge’s decision in a similar case.
5. Summarize and compare litigation and other methods of dispute resolution (ADR).
Be specific in identifying the strengths and weaknesses of each approach.
6. Why is the case of Haig v Bamford considered important in the recent development
of tort law?
7. When is a ‘passing-off’ action appropriate? Make sure your discussion identifies the
key elements which constitute the tort. Compare and contrast this tort to other torts
in the section titled ‘Other Torts Impacting Business’. And note that there is more
information on the passing-off tort in Chapter 13.
8. Identify and discuss the three different types of equitable remedies. Be sure to
distinguish between them in your discussion.
9. Discuss how privity of contract affects the position of people who are not parties to a
contract. In your discussion, include an examination of the Supreme Court decision
in London Drugs Ltd. v. Kuehne & Nagel International Ltd.
10. Discuss the Statute of Frauds as it relates to contract law. In your answer, consider
the justification of requiring some contracts to be evidenced in writing, and also how
and why the Statute of Frauds has been modified or repealed in several jurisdictions.
3
3
DE 209 F20 Assignment 1 Guidelines and Instructions (revised August 2020)
Case Discussion Questions
Respond to the specific questions asked below and ensure that you include in your
responses, discussion of the elements in the grading rubric.
Case 1
According to the Residential Tenancies Act in place in Nova Scotia, residents who have
been renting premises for more than five years have security of tenure, which means
that they can be given notice to leave only if they are in violation of their obligations
under the lease. The Act, however, specifically excludes people who are living in public
housing, and Mrs. Evans, a single mother with two children, had been living in the public
housing for 10 years when she was given one month’s notice to leave.
What arguments might she raise to defeat this notice to vacate? How would it affect
your answer to know that Mrs. Evans was a black woman, and she was one of a group
of black woman on social assistance particularly hard it by the legislation in question?
Case 2
Wembley, a Canadian company, claimed it did not receive goods and services from
ITEX for which it had paid. ITEX argued that the action should not proceed because the
relevant contract said that any actions must be brought in California. Wembley had
completed an application, providing relevant information, two different times. The
application included the word AGREEMENT in bold letters. The section below that
required a separate signature and referred to “the most recent Membership Agreement
and Operating Rules”. The rules required that any action arising under the agreement
“shall lie only in the courts of Sacramento, California” A copy of the agreement and rules
had been provided to Wembley. They were also available on ITEX’s website. The
person who signed the application on behalf of Wembley testified that he would not have
signed it had he read the agreement and rules. He admitted that he ‘did not bother to
read the small print on the Application.”
Was there a contract between Wembley and ITEX? Does it matter that the person
signing the contract did not read all of it? Would the clause giving jurisdiction to the
California court be enforced?
Case 3
Chopra went to Eaton’s department store seeking a refund. An argument ensued.
Smith (the store’s security guard) told Chopra that he would have to leave. Smith took
Chopra’s elbow and started to escort him out of the store. Nears the doors, Chopra
pushed Smith away, presumably wishing to go through the doors unassisted. Smith
reacted quickly and violently putting Chopra into a headlock. Chopra’s glasses were
knocked off his head and his lip was cut; he was handcuffed and detained in the security
office, and subjected to racial slurs. Chopra asked to leave, asked to call his wife, and
asked Smith to call the police. All of these requests were refused. After Chopra had
4
3
DE 209 F20 Assignment 1 Guidelines and Instructions (revised August 2020)
been detained for four hours, the police arrived and charged Chopra with assaulting
Smith and causing a disturbance. All charges were later dismissed.
Identify what causes of action are available to Chopra to address the wrongs done to
him.
Case 4
Roper and Jensen had consumed beer and smoked marijuana before going with Gosling
for the evening to a bar, where they all consumed a considerable amount of alcohol.
They were drunk when they left and got into Roper’s car so that he could drive them
home. A single-car accident caused by Roper’s impairment occurred in which Roper
rolled the car and Gosling was seriously hurt. Gosling sued Roper for negligence.
Indicate what arguments can be raised in Roper’s defense and what factors will the
courts take into consideration in determining liability. Would it make any difference if the
court determined as a finding of fact that although a reasonable person would have been
aware that Roper’s ability to drive was impaired, Gosling wasn’t in fact aware of this
when she got into the vehicle with Roper? What if Gosling didn’t have any other way
home? If Gosling did know about Roper’s impairment, should her conduct be a
complete bar to recovery?
Case 5
The plaintiff, a compulsive shopper, had crammed her apartment with so many
purchases that is was difficult to walk through the unit. This hazardous state of affairs
was discovered when the unit flooded. The managers told the plaintiff she would have
to move her belongings, and they assisted her in removing items to storage. After an
unidentified third party broke in and stole some property, the plaintiff commenced an
action as against the managers of the apartment complex.
Identify the tort that may be applicable in this fact situation. What will the plaintiff need to
establish? Does the plaintiff have a good cause of action? Elaborate in your discussion.
A Caution about Plagiarism
Plagiarism is a serious academic offence that can result in significant negative
consequences.
The Okanagan School of Business has a zero tolerance policy with respect to plagiarism
and you are cautioned to be very careful not to commit plagiarism when responding to
assignments like this. Plagiarism can take a number of forms in this type of assignment
including but not limited to:
•
Submitting the work of another student as your own;
•
Simply copying the contents of the text as it relates to the questions above; and
•
Paraphrasing the contents of the text without proper acknowledgement.
5
3
DE 209 F20 Assignment 1 Guidelines and Instructions (revised August 2020)
If you have any doubts about plagiarism as it applies to this assignment, do not hesitate
to contact me for guidance.
Where you use outside sources in your responses, you must use APA citation and
referencing protocols. In some cases, failure to properly cite and reference sources will
constitute plagiarism. When you use direct quotations from the text or where you
paraphrase the text, you must cite and reference the text using the APA protocols.
The deadline for this assignment is 23:59 PST, Friday, October 16, 2020.
DO NOT ask for an extension of the deadline for any reason other than valid medical
circumstances. Requests for medical extensions will only be considered if you
notify me in advance of the deadline about the medical problem AND attach the
work that you’ve done to that point in time with your notification AND support
your request with a valid medical certificate presented to me within 24 hours of
the deadline.
Dr Michael Conlin
mconlin@okanagan.bc.ca
6
3
Purchase answer to see full
attachment