[pewslideshow slidename=anim2]

Assignment 3 – Exam
Value 40%
World Limit 3,000 words
Purpose of assignment The purpose of this assignment is to assess your level of comprehension and application of all the material covered in this unit.

Marking criteria Demonstrated understanding of the issues covered and their application. Specific marking criteria will be distributed with the exam questions.
Submission details Please submit the assignment electronically through the assignment drop box in the Moodle site for this unit.

Assignment 3 – Take Home Exam


Semester 1, 2012

You are required to answer two (2) of the following questions, one from Part A and one from Part B. Each question is worth 20 marks (20%). Please ensure that you have loaded your answers on Moodle by 11:50pm on Monday 14 May 2012 (Australian Eastern Standard Time). Please note different marking criteria applies to Part A and Part B.

General Requirements
a) The assignment should be not longer than 3,000 words.
b) The assignment must be typed in Microsoft Word, double-spaced or 1.5 spaced, in Times New Roman size 12 font. Please do not send work in PDF or other formats.
c) You must use the footnoting style of referencing.
d) The assignment must be in conformity with referencing guidelines of the Australian Guide to Legal Citation (2nd edition).

PART A – Marking Criteria (Essay/Discussion Questions)
The questions in Part A are essay-type/discussion questions and you are required to comment on, discuss, or critically evaluate a particular proposal or idea, or to review an aspect of the literature.

This category of specific assessment guidelines applies to essay-type assessment. Part A questions will be evaluated on the following criteria/factors:
• Communication – Correct syntax, grammar and spelling, clarity of thought and expression, conformity with prescribed word limit.

• Demonstrated familiarity with literature – the paper reflects a discussion of the issues from an informed perspective. Gone beyond recommended or minimal readings/evidence of wider reading and research.

• Analytical skills, discussion and argument – identification of the question to be discussed, discussion and analysis of relevant arguments and evidence, does not wander, moves beyond emotive responses to deal with evidence and arguments in logical, coherent structure, comes to some kind of conclusion.

• Presentation – correct use of citations, conformity with relevant style guide, layout out, clarity, ease of reading.

PART B – Marking Criteria (Problem-Solving Questions)

This category of specific assessment guidelines applies to problem-type questions. Assessment of this kind will be the most commonly encountered assessment in law units. Typically it will take the form of a hypothetical fact situation, where you will be asked to advise X or Y, and to identify and explain the legal arguments and options which are available.

Part B questions will be evaluated on the following criteria/factors:

• Communication – Correct syntax, grammar and spelling, clarity of thought and expression, conformity with prescribed word limit.

• Demonstrated knowledge of the law and familiarity with relevant literature and readings – reflects a good knowledge of the relevant legislation and relevant case law, an understanding of their scope and operation.

• Analytical skills, discussion and argument – identification, discussion and analysis of relevant arguments and evidence, dealing with evidence and arguments in a logical, coherent structure, reaching conclusion.

• Presentation – correct use of citations, conformity with relevant style guide, layout out, clarity, ease of reading.

Please note that the criteria listed are not necessarily of equal weighting, nor are they all inclusive. The weighting for each criterion is a matter for the academic judgement of the lecturer in charge of the unit. However, all papers are expected to have a significant weighting for written communication skills.

Citing or referencing is the process of acknowledging the words, ideas or data of others used in the preparation of an assessment. This is important to allow the readers of your work to locate and check each source of information and importantly to avoid plagiarism.

• DON’T RESTATE THE FACTS – The facts are given in the assignment question. I know them, so it is not necessary to restate the facts.

• DON’T EXCEED PRESCRIBED WORD LIMIT – You are generally allowed to go over by about 10%, but you will be penalised if you substantially exceed the world limit. Your world limit is 3,000 words.

• AVOID THE USE OF BULLET POINTS – Your answer should be structured in sentences and paragraphs instead of bullet points.

• READ QUESTIONS CAREFULLY – Please read questions carefully and remember to answer all questions.


• RESEARCH MATERIALS/SOURCES – It is recommended that you undertake additional research (beyond material provided in theStudy Guide) to answer the exam questions.

• RELEVANT LAW – when making a legal argument you should support it by referring to a specific statutory provision (section or article or specific Incoterms provisions) or a specific case (case law), NOT textbook or study guide.



Question 1
What is the “Fraud Rule”? It can be argued that the Fraud Rule impinges facilitation of international financial and commercial transactions and therefore it is undesirable and unnecessary. Do you agree/disagree? Why? What are some of the difficulties associated with invoking the fraud rule? Please discuss with reference to provisions of UCP 500 and/or UCP 600 and support your discussion with other relevant literature and/or jurisprudence.
Question 2
Compare and contrast the approaches taken by international law to the regulation of the carriage of goods by sea and by air. In what ways do the Hague-Visby Rules and the Montreal Convention regimes differ? How can greater uniformity and certainty be achieved?


Quetions 3
In January 2012, No Taste Videos Pty Ltd (NTV), a trading company with its place of business in Brisbane, Australia, entered into a contract of sale with Overnight Production Specialists (OPS), a company with its place of business in Sri Lanka, for the importation of 5,000 pre-recorded DVDs. OPS agreed to manufacture the required number of DVDs at a unit sales of price of USD $1.00 by 31 March 2012.

NTV was required to effect payment through an irrevocable letter of credit. NTV approached its bank, Don’t Borrow Bank (DBB) and applied for the issue of an irrevocable letter of credit to the value of USD $5,000 in favour of OPS. DBB agreed and issued an irrevocable letter of credit obliging it, upon the receipt of certain documents indicating shipment of the goods pursuant to the contract, to accept and pay bills of exchange drawn upon DBB for the purchase price of the DVDs.

Following confirmation of the opening of the letter of credit, OPS informed NTV that it could not manufacture and deliver the goods within the time period specified in the contract, and sought an extension until 10 May 2012. NTV refused to agree to the extension because of other contractual commitments.

On 20 March 2012, NTV was informed that documents had been received by DBB from OPS purporting to evidence the shipment. The documents were in strict compliance with the terms and conditions of the letter of credit, so DBB accepted. In fact, when NTV received the goods, there were only 3,000 DVDs and of very poor quality.

Please advise NTV.

Question 4
Aussie Super Cruises Ltd (ASC) with its place of business in Perth, Australia is an operator of 10 luxury cruise ships. The company’s Board of Directors decided to replace engines on 5 of their cruise ships in order to improve the overall performance of its fleet. On 5 May 2012, ASC sent the order form to Best Maritime Builders Ltd (BMB) located in Tokyo, Japan.

The order form specified that ASC wanted to buy five (5) engines and specified the engine type and model number. The order form did not state the price, but instead referred to the “price listed on the website”. The order form also stated “FOB Perth, Incoterms 2010”.

On 18 May 2012, BMB replied by fax “We accept your order of 5 May 2012 and advise that the total contract price is US$2,050,000; the price of each engine being US$290,000 and the rest for the costs of installation and maintenance services for a period of 12 months from the date of installation”. ASC replied by fax later on the same day “We agree to your conditions and would like to go ahead with our order.”

Shortly after installation of new engines it was evident that while the engines complied with minimum international standards, their performance did not meet ASC’s expectations and only improved the performance of boats by 70% (not 90% as expected). The Board of Directors was very disappointed with the performance of the engines.

Under the rules of private international law in Japan, the proper law for international sales of goods is the law of the country where the contract is performed. The Sale of Good legislation in Western Australia (a State of Australia where Perth is located) says that the Courts of Western Australia only have jurisdiction to hear matters where the contract was concluded in Australia.

The Managing Director of ASC comes to you for advice. He specifically wants to know:

• Is there a contract? If yes, when and where was it formed?
• Will CISG apply to the above transaction? Why?
• What courses of action are available to ASC in relation to the engines, what available remedies (if any) are there, and what potential defences are available to the other party?

Advise the Managing Director of ASC on these and any other matters you think relevant

Place an order of a custom essay for this assignment with us now. You are guaranteed; a custom premium paper being delivered within its deadline, personalized customer support and communication with your writer through out the order preparation period.

[pewslideshow slidename=anim3]

Still stressed from student homework?
Get quality assistance from academic writers!