LLB1120 Law of Contract A
Case Analysis Assignment Instructions
Key Information
Due: Friday 9 April 2021 (Week 6), 4pm.
Value: 30% of the total marks for the subject.
Length: 4 pages maximum including footnotes but not including bibliography. Any
material exceeding the page limit will not be marked.
Submission: Online through Turnitin on Moodle.
Format of Assignment
All pages must be in black type with 2.54cm margins on all sides.
The font size must be 12 point font using the ‘Times’ font.
• Line spacing must be double spaced.
• Pages must be numbered.
• Referencing must be in accordance with the Australian Guide to Legal Citation
(‘AGLC’), 4th edition, 2018.
• Footnotes must be used.
• A bibliography must be attached.
• You are encouraged to use headings and sub-headings to separate the different component
of the assignment.
Assessment Criteria
Please see marking rubric at the end of these assignment instructions.
Academic Integrity and Plagiarism
This assignment must be your own original work. You must appropriately acknowledge and
reference all materials that you rely on in your assignment. You can access the University’s
Academic Integrity Policy (http://www.uow.edu.au/about/policy/UOW058648.html) as well
as resources about how to avoid plagiarism on the University’s website.
Note: This is an individual assessment task. You must not discuss with any other person
the issues raised by the question; how the question should be answered; the material that is
relevant to answering the question; or how the answer to the question should be structured.
You must research, plan, organize, develop arguments and lines of analysis, draft text, revise
and edit on your own. You must not show any part of your work in progress or your
completed assignment to any other person undertaking this subject; or read the work in
progress or completed assignment of any other person.
, Assignment Question
In this assignment, you will read, describe, analyse and critically evaluate a recent New South
Wales Supreme Court decision, Personnel Concepts WA Pty Limited v Adam & Ors, t/as
Marsdens Law Group [2019] NSWSC 301.
Undertake the following tasks:
1. (2 pages, 10 marks) Provide a summary of the case, including the following:
• Key information about the case;
• Statement of the relevant facts;
• Explanation of the procedural history;
• Explanation of the legal question(s) in dispute;
• Explanation of the arguments advanced by each of the parties in relation to the legal
questions;
• Analysis of how Wright J applies the doctrine of precedent;
• Explanation of the ratio decidendi; and
• Description of the outcome and orders.
2. (1 page, 10 marks) Imagine that you are a solicitor acting for Personnel Concepts in this
case. Your client has instructed you to appeal the decision of Wright J to the NSW Court
of Appeal. How could you apply the doctrine of precedent to develop legal arguments for
your client, based on Brambles Holdings Ltd v Bathurst City Council (2001) 53 NSWLR
153 and Empirnall Holdings v Machon Paull Partners (1988) 14 NSWLR 523? What
counter-arguments would you also need to consider?
3. (1 page, 10 marks) Critically evaluate Personnel Concepts WA Pty Limited v Adam & Ors
t/as Marsdens Law Group in relation to theoretical approaches to contract law discussed
in the readings and seminars. You may wish to consider classical contract theory,
relational theories of contract, and critical approaches to contract law. Consider the
following questions:
What theories of contract are reflected in the court’s analysis of contract formation
in this case?
What are the strengths and weaknesses of this approach?
What alternative theories of contract are available, and how could they be applied
to this case?
Do you think the court’s approach has produced a just outcome? Why or why not?
Case Analysis Assignment Instructions
Key Information
Due: Friday 9 April 2021 (Week 6), 4pm.
Value: 30% of the total marks for the subject.
Length: 4 pages maximum including footnotes but not including bibliography. Any
material exceeding the page limit will not be marked.
Submission: Online through Turnitin on Moodle.
Format of Assignment
All pages must be in black type with 2.54cm margins on all sides.
The font size must be 12 point font using the ‘Times’ font.
• Line spacing must be double spaced.
• Pages must be numbered.
• Referencing must be in accordance with the Australian Guide to Legal Citation
(‘AGLC’), 4th edition, 2018.
• Footnotes must be used.
• A bibliography must be attached.
• You are encouraged to use headings and sub-headings to separate the different component
of the assignment.
Assessment Criteria
Please see marking rubric at the end of these assignment instructions.
Academic Integrity and Plagiarism
This assignment must be your own original work. You must appropriately acknowledge and
reference all materials that you rely on in your assignment. You can access the University’s
Academic Integrity Policy (http://www.uow.edu.au/about/policy/UOW058648.html) as well
as resources about how to avoid plagiarism on the University’s website.
Note: This is an individual assessment task. You must not discuss with any other person
the issues raised by the question; how the question should be answered; the material that is
relevant to answering the question; or how the answer to the question should be structured.
You must research, plan, organize, develop arguments and lines of analysis, draft text, revise
and edit on your own. You must not show any part of your work in progress or your
completed assignment to any other person undertaking this subject; or read the work in
progress or completed assignment of any other person.
, Assignment Question
In this assignment, you will read, describe, analyse and critically evaluate a recent New South
Wales Supreme Court decision, Personnel Concepts WA Pty Limited v Adam & Ors, t/as
Marsdens Law Group [2019] NSWSC 301.
Undertake the following tasks:
1. (2 pages, 10 marks) Provide a summary of the case, including the following:
• Key information about the case;
• Statement of the relevant facts;
• Explanation of the procedural history;
• Explanation of the legal question(s) in dispute;
• Explanation of the arguments advanced by each of the parties in relation to the legal
questions;
• Analysis of how Wright J applies the doctrine of precedent;
• Explanation of the ratio decidendi; and
• Description of the outcome and orders.
2. (1 page, 10 marks) Imagine that you are a solicitor acting for Personnel Concepts in this
case. Your client has instructed you to appeal the decision of Wright J to the NSW Court
of Appeal. How could you apply the doctrine of precedent to develop legal arguments for
your client, based on Brambles Holdings Ltd v Bathurst City Council (2001) 53 NSWLR
153 and Empirnall Holdings v Machon Paull Partners (1988) 14 NSWLR 523? What
counter-arguments would you also need to consider?
3. (1 page, 10 marks) Critically evaluate Personnel Concepts WA Pty Limited v Adam & Ors
t/as Marsdens Law Group in relation to theoretical approaches to contract law discussed
in the readings and seminars. You may wish to consider classical contract theory,
relational theories of contract, and critical approaches to contract law. Consider the
following questions:
What theories of contract are reflected in the court’s analysis of contract formation
in this case?
What are the strengths and weaknesses of this approach?
What alternative theories of contract are available, and how could they be applied
to this case?
Do you think the court’s approach has produced a just outcome? Why or why not?
