business Law Extra Credit Question DUE THIS COMING WEDNESDAY NIGHT! Two days time!

Extra Credit Question

David and Gary attended St. Anthony’s College’s carnival all-inclusive event, where they both took full advantage of the free drinks and got extremely drunk. David offered Gary a lift home in his car, which Gary accepted although he knew David was drunk. On the way home, they stopped at mini-mart and threw a brick through a window. Disturbed by a policeman, David drove off at high speed and, due to his negligent driving, collided with a car driven by Lance.

Gary, who was not wearing a seat belt, was badly injured and Lance suffered serious injuries to his legs. Lance, a Jehovah’s Witness, refused a blood transfusion at the hospital as it was contrary to his religious beliefs. As a result, he had to have one leg amputated. However, later, due to the fact that Lance could not go to work and provide for his family, he became severely depressed and committed suicide three months later.

1. Can Gary sue David? Consider any possible defences.

2. Can Lance’s wife, Shanice, sue David? Consider any possible defences.

GUIDE TO ANSWERING EXAM QUESTIONS IN LAW

Prepared by – LECTURER:

IRAC

method of answering problem questions in Law

Issues – Outline the issues that you are going to discuss.

Rules – Define the legal rules that are relevant to the question.

Application – Apply the legal rules to the facts of the question (this is the hard part!).

Conclusion – Tie things up, usually in the form of an advice to your hypothetical client.

Always use your reading time wisely to PLAN YOUR ANSWER before writing. This is of utmost importance as it will help you clarify your thoughts and ensure that you avoid following desperate exam strategies that unprepared students commonly resort to, such as:

i) ‘the kitchen sink’ i.e. spilling all of your knowledge that is vaguely related to the topic onto the exam paper and hoping for the best.

ii) ‘the garden path’ i.e. going off on an irrelevant tangent

Remember that the APPLICATION IS THE MOST IMPORTANT SECTION of your answer and should take up the bulk of your time. The actual conclusions you reach are often superfluous. Rather, your marker will be most interested in how you arrived at your conclusion.

1. Read the entire question at least once completely, carefully watching for who the parties may be.

2. Remember, the facts generate the legal dispute; therefore, examine the question sentence by sentence to see what the parties actually did that had some impact on each other; only behaviour by one party that impacts another party is relevant; make brief notes by each sentence highlighting the relevant facts.

3. Based on the relevant facts, make a short outline of the issues raised; remember, the issues arise only from facts in dispute; where the impact of what one party did to another party may be interpreted in different ways or is disagreed upon by the parties or suggests that some punishment is merited, there the issue arises.

FACTS

Even if you are not required to submit a list of facts in your answer, it is a good idea to write one.

 

This will help you sort through the facts you have been given and determine which facts are relevant and how you are going to use them. The following is a list of questions that may help you do this:

· Who is involved? (identify parties specifically by name, if possible)

· Who suffered?

· How?

· Why? (was it avoidable?)

· What is the known (relevant) information?

· Is there any missing information?

· Include specific details like dates and monetary figures

Note: Reread the question at the end of the case study. This will tell you what you are supposed to be doing and it will help you determine which facts are relevant.

 

ISSUES

· Identify the problem: what has gone wrong and for whom?

· Name each Plaintiff and Defendant and briefly describe their individual issues

· Work out what area of law may govern the resolution of the problem.

· This could include, but is not limited to the following bodies of law:

· Contract law (be specific about which part)

· Employment Law (e.g. employment status)

· Company/Corporate Law (e.g. breach of director’s duty)

· Criminal Law (crime and possible defences)

· Tort Law (e.g. breach of duty)

· Assignments generally relate to one area of law but the assignment will usually raise a number of issues within that general area.

· Identify any conflicting or troublesome facts

· Note: Assessment tasks are set around the work that you have done in class or will do in class. You are not expected to go outside the content of the unit but you are expected to explore it

Rules and relevant Law

· Set out the legal principles that will be used to address the problem.

· Source legal principles from cases and legislation.

Note: Make sure you are specific when stating the relevant law/rules that apply, and always make sure to support propositions with case authority.

 

APPLICATION

· Explain in detail why the claims are (or are not) justified, based on the body of law pertaining to the case.

· How will this law be used by each party to argue their case?

· Use relevant case precedent or Legal Principles to support each answer. Do not state your personal opinion!

· You may also choose to use Legislation, when applicable.

· There are often several parties involved. Take the time to examine each case individually and analyse why their claims are (or are not) valid.

· Legal Principals and precedent cases are used in each analysis, even if there is overlap among parties (the same precedent can be applied to both parties, if appropriate).

· It is acceptable to refer the reader to another point in the paper, rather than rewriting it word for word, if the situation calls for the same legal recommendation.

Note: Take time to discuss the contentious aspects of the case rather than the ones that are most comfortable or obvious.

 

CONCLUSION

· Stand back and play ‘the judge.’

· Choose the argument you think is the strongest and articulate what you believe to be the appropriate answer.

· State who is liable for what and to what extent.

· Consider how parties could have acted to better manage their risks in order to avoid this legal problem.

ANOTHER EMAIL THAT OUR LECTURER SENT US

Hello students, 

I have seen some of the work produced for the extra-credit assignment, and again, in my efforts to ensure that you guys get this right, I have decided to send this e-mail. 

Remember IRAC!!!

1. Identify the issues in the question – Who, what, why, how? You must answer those questions before moving on.
–Example: Who was injured? Who caused the injury? How was that person injured? What defences can be used? How can that defence fail?


1. Rules – identify the area of law and the possible cases; THEN, consider the possible defences that can be used and why those defences would, or would not work. Do not give me just one defence. The question says defenceS- plural. 
—Example: You should be asking yourself; “What defences might David try to use?”; then you must decide whether or not these defences would stand up.


1. Apply the rules, principles and cases in a logical order. Answer in the 3rd-person, using “He, she, they”, NOT “You”
—Example: According to the case of John v Joe (2013), David’s defence of “I was drunk”
(NOTE: this is NOT an actual defence to tort)
, would not work because being drunk is only a partial defence, so he would still be held liable, and this would be apportioned by the *Act mentioned in PowerPoint presentation*.


1. Conclusion means explain in detail. Justify your answers properly. 
–Example: “While David’s defences may seem logical in some regards, they will fail in the courts because of…”

I do not expect less than a full page for this assignment.

I think this case will help some of you: Blaue (1975).

Also I had posted many slides on topics and cases that we have done in class. We need to use any cases from the slides. And according to the lecturer, DO NOT USE any cases that relate to Americal law.