Welcome to Live Chat

Welcome to LiveWebTutors Services, World's leading Academic solutions provider with Millions of Happy Students.

Call Back
logo

24x7 Support Available

To Get the Best Price Chat With Our Experts

chat now

In A Hurry? Get A Callback

shopping cart 0

Subject Solutions Code Description Price Delete

Amount Payable : $0

continue shopping proceed to checkout

World's Leading Assignment Library

Case Baker v Gilbert (2003) - IRAC Method

Question Preview:

Illustration of the the principles relating to the law of torts; and Explain the principles relating to contract law. Due date: Week 5.1 1. Create a group of 3 students. 2. The Lecturer will select a case below to find, read, understand, summarise, and present. 3. The length of the written assignment is to be approximately 2100 Words. (Each member of the group must write 700 words). 4. The presentation slides must be in the IRAC method. Maximum 9 slides, and three short points per slide. 5. Each member of the group is to present the following part of the IRAC method as listed ...

View Complete Question >>

Question Preview:

Illustration of the the principles relating to the law of torts; and Explain the principles relating to contract law. Due date: Week 5.1 1. Create a group of 3 students. 2. The Lecturer will select a case below to find, read, understand, summarise, and present. 3. The length of the written assignment is to be approximately 2100 Words. (Each member of the group must write 700 words). 4. The presentation slides must be in the IRAC method. Maximum 9 slides, and three short points per slide. 5. Each member of the group is to present the following part of the IRAC method as listed below (I= issues and facts; Relevant laws and principles; A= Arguments of the parties and Analysis, C= conclusion and court outcome). (Member 1: Issues and Relevant law, Member 2: Arguments raised by parties and Analysis Member 3: Conclusion, Court outcome and Role of relevant court) Note: Although each group member’s task is clearly allocated and they are required to present their part, but each member is expected to know the full case and may be asked question from any part of the case. 6. The task is worth a total of 30% of your final marks. Case Options (lecturer approval required) 1.Pavey & Matthews Pty Ltd v Paul (1987) 2.ANZ v Westpac (1988) 3.Tabcorp Holdings v Bowen Investments Pty Ltd (2009) 4.Commonwealth v Amann Aviation Pty Ltd (1991) 5.Koompahtoo Local Aborginal Land Council v Sanpine Pty Ltd (2007) 6.Codelfa Construction Pty Ltd v State Rail authority of NSW (1982) 7.Zhu v Treasurer of the State of NSW (2004) 8.Darlington Futures Ltd v Delco Australia Pty Ltd (1986) 9.Commercial Bank of Australia v Amadio (1983) 10.Louth v Diprose (1992) 11.San Sebastian Pty Ltd v The Minister Administering Environmental, Planning and Assessment Act (1986) 12.Walton Stores (Interstate) v Maher (1988) 13.Imbree v McNeilly (2008) 14.Burnie Port Authority v General Jones (1994) 15.Agar v Hyde (2000) 16.Romeo v Conservation Commission of the Northern Territory (1998) 17.Graham Barclay Oysters Pty Ltd v Ryan (2002) 18.Nagel v Rottnest Island Authority (1993) 19.Trident General Insurance Co Ltd v McNiece Bros Pty Ltd (1988) 20.Port Jackson Stevedoring Pty Ltd v Salmond & Spraggon (1978) 21.Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain v Boots Cash Chemists (Southern) LD [1953] 22.Mobil Oil Australia Ltd v Wellcome Intern’l Pty Ltd (1998) 23.Curtis v Chemical Cleaning and Dyeing Co (1951) 24.Empirnall Holdings v Machon Paull (1988) 25.Modbury Triangle Shopping Centre v Anzil (2000) 26.Roads and Traffic Authority v Dederer (2007) 27.Esanda Finance v Peat Marwick Hungerfords (1997) 28.Fallas v Mourlas (2006) 29.Rogers v Whitaker (1992) 30.Caltex Oil v Dredge (1976) 31.Perre v Apand (1999) 32.L Shaddock v Parramatta City Council (1982) 33.Wyong Shire Council v Shirt (1980) 34.Hawkins v Clayton (1988) 35.Koehler v Cerebos (Aust) Ltd (2005) 36.Horne v Queensland (1995) 37.Peter Joseph Haylen v NSW Rugby Union Ltd (2002) 38.Flavel v State of SA (2008) 39.Tame v NSW (2001) 40.Annetts v Australian Stations Pty Ltd (2001) 41.Hackshaw v Shaw (1984) 42.Baker v Gilbert (2003) 43.Australian Safeway Stores v Zaluzna (1987) 44.ACCCv Prysmian Cavi E Sistemi S.R.L. (No 12) [2016] FCA 822 (20 July 2016) 45.ACCCv Online Dealz Pty Ltd [2016] FCA 732 (21 June 2016) 46.ACCCv Snowdale Holdings Pty Ltd [2016] FCA 541 (18 May 2016) 47.ACCCv A.C.N. 099 814 749 Pty Ltd [2016] FCA 403 (22 April 2016) 48.ACCCv CLA Trading Pty Ltd [2016] FCA 377 (19 April 2016) 49.ACCCv Chrisco Hampers Australia Limited (No 2) [2016] FCA 144 (1 March 2016) 50.ACCCv Australian Egg Corporation Limited [2016] FCA 69 (10 February 2016) 51.ACCCv Bunavit Pty Ltd [2016] FCA 6 (12 January 2016) 52.ACCCv Reckitt Benckiser (Australia) Pty Ltd (No 4) [2015] FCA 1408 (11 December 2015) 53.ACCCv Hillside (Australia New Media) Pty Ltd trading as Bet365 [2015] FCA 1007 (11 September 2015) Assessment Criteria Group oral presentation and visual slides 50% Written Assignment: Identify the issues of the case 10% Written Assignment: Explain the relevant law relating to the case 10% Written Assignment: Discuss the analysis and legal arguments raised by the parties in case 10% Written Assignment: Summarise the judgement of the case 10% Written Assignment: Illustrate the role, purpose and scope of the relevant court, or tribunal. 10% TOTAL 100% TOTAL /30% Criteria High Distinction 80% - Distinction 70%- 79% Credit 60-69% Pass 50-59% Fail 0-49% Group oral presentation and visual slides At all times: 1. the group was cohesive and courteous; 2. the oral presentations were clear and understandable; 3. the oral presentations were accurate or precise in relation to the details of the case; 4. the presentation slides were logical and structured; and 5. the oral presentations were interesting and engaging. At all times: 1. the group was cohesive and courteous; 2. the oral presentations were clear and understandable; 3. the oral presentations were accurate or precise in relation to the details of the case; and 4. the presentation slides were logical and structured. Most of the times: 1. the group was cohesive and courteous; 2. the oral presentations were clear and understandable; 3. the oral presentations were accurate or precise in relation to the details of the case; and 4. the presentation slides were logical and structured. Some of the times: 1. the group was cohesive and courteous; 2. the oral presentations were clear and understandable; 3. the oral presentations were accurate or precise in relation to the details of the case; and 4. the presentation slides were logical and structured. At no times: 1. the group was cohesive and courteous; 2. the oral presentations were clear and understandable; 3. the oral presentations were accurate or precise in relation to the details of the case; and 4. the presentation slides were logical and structured. Written Assignment: Identify the Issues of the case All the issues are clearly and accurately detailed with reference to cases with similar facts. All the issues are clearly and accurately detailed. Most of the issues are clearly and accurately summarised. Some of the issues are clearly and accurately outlined in brief. The issues are not clearly or accurately outlined. Written Assignment: Explain the relevant law relating to the case All of the relevant law is clearly and accurately detailed, and the Act and related cases are referenced and discussed. All of the relevant law is clearly and accurately detailed. Most of the relevant law is clearly and accurately summarised. Some of the relevant law is clearly and accurately outlined in brief. The relevant law is not clearly or accurately outlined. Written Assignment: Discuss and apply the legal arguments raised by the parties in case All the legal arguments are clearly and accurately detailed, and there is a synthesis with the relevant law. All the legal arguments are clearly and accurately detailed. Most of legal arguments are clearly and accurately summarised. Some of the legal arguments are clearly and accurately outlined in brief. The legal arguments are clearly or accurately outlined. Written Assignment: Summarise the judgement of the case The decision of the judge is accurately detailed with reference to any dissenting judgements or precedents. The decision of the judge is accurately detailed. The decision of the judge is accurately summarised in summary format. The decision of the judge is accurately outlined in brief. The decision of the judge is inaccurate or incomplete. Written Assignment: Illustrate the role, purpose and scope of the relevant court, or tribunal. The role, purpose, and scope of the court or tribunal were perfectly clear, logical, formatted, and grammatically correct. The role, purpose, and scope of the court or tribunal were perfectly clear, logical, formatted, and grammatically correct. The role, purpose, and scope of the court or tribunal were very clear, logical, formatted, and grammatically correct. The role, purpose, and scope of the court or tribunal were fairly clear, logical, formatted, and grammatically correct. The role, purpose, and scope of the court or tribunal were absent.

View Less >>

Solution Preview

Issue of the case:

This case represents the duty of care which required to be taken by the occupier of the property; with respect to any material defects which may cause harm to the lawful visitors in the normal circumstances. In November’1997 Ms Gilbert; had visited swimming pool occupied by Mr. Baker; where the ladder attached to footplate

question Get solution

$30

Orginal Price : $39.0

Pay Now

Upload Assignments

250 words

side

Get Your Assignment

Don’t delay more, place your order now. Quick assignment help will be offered to you.

Order Now

CUSTOMER REVIEWS

Excellent

logo

Based on 702 reviews See all reviews here

One of the Best Service

I trust LiveWebTutors for my assignments because of their ability to deliver the perfect assignments time and again. Only a few of my assignments required minor revisions. The rest assured it is the best assignment writing service in the market.

Elizabeth
Sydney

Great Service and on time

I felt so exhausted and burdened with the large number of assignments I had to write and desperately needed someone to help me with all the writing and there was LiveWebTutors company on the internet. They finished my assignments before the due date and also offered me a first-timer discount.

Christina
Perth

One of the Best Assignment Provider

I ordered my Mathematics and Marketing assignments from them last month. I received the content on the set date. Most importantly, the assignments were well-written and plagiarism free. I scored a top grade for the assignment written by them. They are a reliable company.

Oli
Brisbane

Very Helpful Customer Service

I was quite unsure about getting my assignment written online but after coming across LiveWebTutors.com, all my worries have vanished. The quality of the assignments written by their writers is just invincible. Their customer support is very polite and helpful. You should try their service at least once

Kabir
Adelaide