Identify and briefly describe the two main sources of law that exist in the Australian legal system. (5 marks) b) Explain how a single event such as a serious car accident can result in both a criminal prosecution an

Jamez

21 Mar 2026 • 5 min read

Final Assessment

LAW8916 Business Law

Trimester 3, 2025

LAW8916 Final Assessment T3 2025 Page 2 of 4

Assessment Type: Recorded Video Presentation (Individual)

Weighting: 50%

Learning Outcomes Assessed: Learning Outcomes 1, 2 and 3

Video Duration: 30 minutes

Due Date: 12 February 2026 (Friday) 11:59 pm (AEDT)

All submissions must be submitted with a signed Ozford Institute of Higher Education Cover Sheet via Moodle. Late submissions will attract a penalty of 5% of the assessment weighting for each calendar day late unless the lecturer grants an extension.

INSTRUCTIONS TO STUDENTS:

This assignment consists of two parts. Students are required to provide answers to the questions given in both parts in the form of a recorded video presentation. Students are also required to submit the PowerPoint slides used in the presentation.

Please refer to the marking rubrics for further information on the marking criteria.

Part A: Short-Essay Questions (30 marks)

Question 1 (10 marks)

a) Identify and briefly describe the two main sources of law that exist in the Australian legal system. (5 marks)

b) Explain how a single event such as a serious car accident can result in both a criminal prosecution and a civil lawsuit. How can the same set of facts lead to two different legal actions with different results? (5 marks)

Question 2 (10 marks)

In the tort of negligence, how does the court decide if a defendant has breached their duty of care? Discuss the role of the 'reasonable person' in this assessment.

Question 3 (10 marks)

a) Identify five differences between a partnership and a company. (5 marks)

b) A company is considering expanding its operations and needs capital to do so. What are the options available to the company in raising further funds? (5 marks)

Part B: Problem-Based Questions (20 marks)

Question 1 (10 marks)

David, a cafe owner, entered into a contract with Expert Kitchens Ltd (Expert Kitchens) to install a custom commercial oven. The contract price was $15,000, and the installation date was strictly set for 1 October as David had spent $5,000 on advertising for his Grand Opening on 2 October.

LAW8916 Final Assessment T3 2025 Page 3 of 4

On 1 October, Expert Kitchens informed David they cannot perform the installation because they had accepted another job. David was forced to find another supplier at the last minute, and because of the short notice, he has to pay $20,000 for the same oven and installation. Furthermore, the new installation was not finished until 10 October.

As a result, David had to cancel his Grand Opening, losing the $5,000 spent on advertising and also lost $8,000 in estimated profits from the eight days the cafe was closed.

Advise David on the legal remedies available to him under contract law.

Question 2 (10 marks)

Arthur, Bill, and Chris are the only shareholders of Sporting Pty Ltd, each owning 30 shares. Bill and Arthur are the only directors. Following a bitter argument, Bill and Arthur wish to change the company's constitution to ensure Chris can never become a director. However, they lack the 75% majority required for a special resolution because Chris holds more than 25% of the shares.

To bypass this, Bill and Arthur plan to pass a directors' resolution to issue 100 new shares to their friend, David, for $100,000. They know David will vote with them to change the constitution. While the company actually needs the $100,000 for capital works, the primary reason for the issuance is to dilute Chris's voting power.

Advise Bill and Arthur if they would breach any directors' duties under the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) by going forward with their plan.

END OF ASSESSMENT

LAW8916 Final Assessment T3 2025 Page 4 of 4

Marking Rubrics

Criteria	High Distinction 80-100%	Distinction 70-79%	Credit 60-69%	Pass 50-59%	Fail 0-49%
Identification of the relevant rules (both parts) (20 Marks)	All the relevant rules have been stated correctly and in enough detail. All the relevant section(s) of the legislation and/or case(s) have been referred to as the sources of the law.	Most of the relevant rules have been stated correctly and in enough detail. Most of the relevant section(s) of the legislation and/or case(s) have been referred to as the sources of the law.	Many relevant rules have been stated correctly and in enough detail. Some rules may be missing or have not been stated correctly or in enough detail. Many relevant section(s) of the legislation and/or case(s) have been referred to as the sources of the law.	About half of the relevant rules have been stated. Other issues may be missing or have not been stated correctly or in enough detail. Some relevant section(s) of the legislation and/or case(s) have been referred to as the sources of the law.	Less than half of the rules have been stated or the statements of the rules are not correct or detailed enough. There is limited or no reference to the relevant section(s) of the legislation and/or case(s).
Critical discussion and analysis (Part A only) or Application of the rules to the facts (Part B only) (20 Marks)	Students deliver an in-depth and sophisticated discussion, demonstrating nuanced critical analysis that evaluates the effectiveness, limitations and policy implications of the rules, with clear originality of thought and strong reasoning. (Part A) All the rules have been applied to the facts of the case. The argument is cogent and very well structured. (Part B)	Students present a thorough and well-reasoned discussion of the rules, critically analysing their purpose, operation, strengths, weaknesses, and practical implications. (Part A) Most of the rules have been applied to the facts of the case. The argument is clear and well structured. However, there is some scope for further development. (Part B)	Students provide a good discussion of the rules, explaining their application and offering some critical commentary on their effectiveness, limitations, or broader impact. (Part A) Many relevant rules have been applied to the facts of the case. The argument is generally supported by reasons. However, some rules have not been applied, or further analysis should be added in some parts of the answer. (Part B)	Students demonstrate a limited discussion of the rules, offering basic commentary on their purpose or effect, with minimal evaluation of implications or limitations. (Part A) About half of relevant rules have been applied to the facts of the case. The argument is clear but not supported in many parts of the answer. (Part B)	Students provide little or no discussion of the rules, with minimal or inaccurate commentary, showing little understanding of implications, purpose, or relevance. (Part A) There is limited or no application of the rules to the facts of the case. Limited or no analysis is included to support the argument. (Part B)
Presentation (both parts) (10 Marks)	The presentation is highly professional, visually polished, and engaging, with slides and video seamlessly integrated to enhance understanding, demonstrating exceptional clarity, organisation, and confident, persuasive delivery.	The presentation is wellstructured, clear, and engaging, with slides and video effectively complementing the content, demonstrating professional visual design, smooth delivery, and effective communication of key points.	The presentation is clearly organised and mostly engaging, with slides and video effectively supporting the content, demonstrating competent visual design, clarity, and verbal delivery.	The presentation is understandable but may be inconsistently structured or unclear at times, with slides and video adequately communicating the content, though visual design or delivery may be basic.	The presentation is poorly structured, difficult to follow, with slides and video lacking clarity, coherence, or visual organisation, and the content is inadequately communicated.