BUSL250 take home exam (1 Viewer)

[choco]

anyway this 500 word limit is way too short its so hard to stick to !!!!!! wonder how strict they really are?

 

[boinkBOINK]

do u think the 10% rule applies? u know 10 over 10 under?

hey for ques3 im abit perplexed =\
so like does the guy have a case or not?
any help would be cool

 

[yenta]

also i'm a bit confused for q. 1.5 could someone explain what it means, mainly the 'contrast the actions for' bit? (prob sounds like a stupid question i know)

 

[boinkBOINK]

seems as though everyones confused lol

 

[redruM]

i'm not confused at all...




maybe thats because i havent started it yet

just finished the accg200 quiz. hope i passed

 

[ReaveR]

I'm hell confused!

I reckon this assignment is pretty badly worded...contrast the actions, is that meant to mean what they are, or actions you can take to remedy, or what?!

And what about 'operation' of the residential tenancies legislation...how its used or what it contains within the act?

And a question about footnoting, if we take information from one paragraph from the book and list it in dot points, would we have to footnote each point/line? Or just stick one somewhere near the beginning?

Rahul good luck with your quiz =)

Edit: And the wordlimit nooooooooooo!!

 

[boinkBOINK]

yea the ass. is worded pretty badly
even my friends said so. alot of gramatical errors too let alone the badly worded questions that are pretty ambiguous about what their asking


edit
anyone wanna be nice as to share the cases they used for ques3?

 

[choco]

where's skittled when you need him?

 

[boinkBOINK]

far out
i DONT KNOW what to write at all for q3
like from the very start i can just end the question with why he wouldnt have a case

=\

 

[ReaveR]

Haha, I don't know where to start for 2.
I guess I should start looking at Ch2 or somewhere around there.

For 3, you'd have to identify the legal problems first, then go through each and every issue comparing to the law as you go along, adapting to your case. Don't forget to refer to the Civil Liability Act.

^ None of that actually helps me start either, its just what my tutor told me =p

 

[boinkBOINK]

yea i got that bit =\
but then its actually putting that into words thats difficult =\
im like well for the past 8hrs ive been stuck.
i feel like banging my head on a wall

 

[boinkBOINK]

can anyone here clarify for me what
"on the PROFITABILITY OR OTHERWISE of the two shops he is interested in buying"
means?

what does the "or otherwise" mean?
anyone?

 

[ReaveR]

Haha, I got into a huge argument with my friend about what "on the PROFITABILITY OR OTHERWISE of the two shops he is interested in buying" is meant to mean...

Damn silly assignment.

 

[boinkBOINK]

lol so what was the conclusion of the argument?
does "or otherwise"
mean like or ANYTHIng ELSE that would come into question on the profitability of the shop?
or....?


EDIT
it says "YOU are a solicitor. Advice john if he has a claim...."
does that mean we refer to him as YOU or does it have to be in third person ie. John and Quick Figures
or can it be like. therefore YOU have a case against qf
?

 

[Orange Juice]

hahah its 2nd night and im still in square one... hahha this is great... havnt even done the whole q1

 

[yenta]

My guess would be that the profitability or otherwise could mean like other financial information (e.g. return on investment, liquidity etc.) which would tell them whether it would be a good investment or not?

 

[boinkBOINK]

so does that include whether the other shops would open new stores or not?

and with my question about adressing him personally?

 

[ReaveR]

Yeah my tutor said you're meant to be writing it like a real solicitor would, so you'd address them personally in the report.

The argument didn't conclude anything lol

I actually don't think the accountant would know if they're opening new stores.
It's not like accountants go and ask the owners what they're going to do in the future, as they're not likely to disclose that. Don't accountants construct these sorts of reports from publically available information, like its profit and loss statements etc.? Then in this case, there isn't really any way of knowing if they're going to open new stores, unless disclosed in the types of reports that shareholders get from big companies...which these small stores wouldn't have? Even if they did any future investment talk would be vague.

So, I'm going to say that Bing Lee can't have known...

 

[yenta]

Lol umm I think I will address him as you, since it says advise him, hence we are supposed to be communicating to HIM. But would they really be that nit-picky and deduct marks if we say him instead of you or vice versa?

 

[Skittled]

can anyone here clarify for me what
"on the PROFITABILITY OR OTHERWISE of the two shops he is interested in buying" means? what does the "or otherwise" mean?

My guess would be that the profitability or otherwise could mean like other financial information (e.g. return on investment, liquidity etc.) which would tell them whether it would be a good investment or not?

so does that include whether the other shops would open new stores or not?

...I Interpreted it as Bing Lee (B) having to refer to the business's profit or otherwise... another way of putting it would be to refer to the business's profitability or lack therefof. So, utterly and essentially: whether the businesses are profitable, or not.

I dunno, maybe the accountants can correct me if I'm wrong: the accountant's role (in this case) was to provide a PROFITABILITY REPORT. Not to provide business forecasting for something months away (they don't open shops till months after). However, it could be reasonably foreseeable that competition would come about. I personally think that that's the nature of business, and part of the risk of investing in your own business. Thus, J should have known about it himself... but that's not considered in an action against B. However, It IS reasonably foreseeable that competition could arise, in my opinion. I don't think B needs to mention it, and we'll establish that by the end of the case, but it IS reasonably foreseeable that competition could arise.

However, as a professional, B only has to act based on the current circumstances (see G&F... somepage.)

I'd say he's got duty. I'd say he's got breach, but I'd not say there's causation, and thus he fails on damages (and besides that, damages don't even EXIST yet.. he's 'furious' about the losses he's predicting). That's the route I'm taking, but you could go off in any tangent you like, really. It's just a matter of arguing from the right perspective to say what you need to. My tutor said that it's less whether you get it right or wrong, in as much as you demonstrate that you know how to reference, how to look up cases, how to apply the facts to the law, etc etc. So, it's more the process than getting the 'right' or 'wrong' results.

it says "YOU are a solicitor. Advice john if he has a claim...." does that mean we refer to him as YOU or does it have to be in third person ie. John and Quick Figures or can it be like. therefore YOU have a case against qf?

I've not taken this into account thus far... I remember Ms Blazey saying we should make reference to our role as a solicitor advising our client... I'd not bother with the third persn stuff.. just write the damned thing. Put at the top that you're writing a report for the eyes of J, and then at the end make it look like you're writing to J personally or something...