Todd and Zac are best friends who both attend a university in Adelaide.

Click here to order this assignment @Essaywriting.us.No Plagiarism.Written from scratch by professional writers.

BUSN 1019 – Individual Written Assignment, Semester 2, 2018
Proportion of Marks: 30%
Word Limit: 1500 words
Due Date: Friday 14 September 2018 at 4.00 pm
General Expectations
• Assignments must be lodged electronically through FLO as a single word document.
• Assignments are to be prepared on an individual basis – you may not discuss your
assignment answers or prepare assignment work with other students. This is collusion – a
breach of academic integrity.
• Collusion, plagiarism and other forms of academic dishonesty are treated as serious offences
by the University and are subject to harsh penalties, which may include expulsion from the
University. Ensure that you have read and understood the University’s policy on academic
dishonesty, as contained in the Student related Policies and Procedures Manual, for further
information refer to:
http://www.flinders.edu.au/ppmanual/student/academic-integrity.cfm
• Penalties apply for late submission and/or exceeding the word count – please refer to page 2
of the Statement of Assessment Methods
Further Information and Instructions are on the following pages.
1) Purpose of Assignment
The purpose of this assignment is to provide an opportunity to develop the following skills:
1. Navigating legislation and identifying sections relevant to a particular issue;
2. Reading and interpreting sections of legislation;
3. Use the IRAC method to engage in preliminary legal problem solving in a commercial
scenario; and
4. Referencing and footnoting using the Australian Guide to Legal Citation.
2) Using Legal Resources and Referencing
For this task you will need to obtain a copy of the Partnership Act 1891 (SA). This can be found at:
https://www.legislation.sa.gov.au/LZ/C/A/PARTNERSHIP%20ACT%201891/CURRENT/1891.506.
AUTH.PDF
In addition to this, you should also refer to Chapter 20 of the textbook, especially the case example
boxes. These cases may assist with interpreting the legislation to a certain extent.
For the purpose of this assignment these are the only resource you need to use. You do not need to
research any other legislation or research any other case law.
1

You must correctly cite and footnote the legislation and cases in accordance with the Australian Guide
to Legal Citation version 3 (AGLC v3). AGLC is a footnoting system. A simplified guide to AGLC v3 has
been uploaded on the FLO site. Please remember, if you are citing a case based on information from
the textbook (i.e. you have not actually read the case), then your citation needs to reflect this – please
refer to the AGLC guide.
1 A lawyer providing advice on this issue would of course research relevant case law as well, and consider all
relevant legal issues and legislation, but you are not required to.
3) Scenario and Questions
Todd and Zac are best friends who both attend a university in Adelaide. Todd is a business student
majoring in marketing and Zac is a science student majoring in chemistry.
Todd and Zac like beer and last year they decided to make their own home brew. Zac, using his own
money, purchased a 50 litre micro-brew equipment set. Todd and Zac worked together to set up the
equipment in Todd’s Dad’s shed and they created their first batch of beer. Their initial batch of home
brew was actually quite good, and Zac then started experimenting with a range of different grains and
fermenting processes. Zac discovered a way which he could use eucalyptus leaves to speed up the
fermenting process and enhance the flavour of the beer. They entered their brew into the “Adelaide
Extravaganza” home brew contest at the end of last year and won two awards: one for “best tasting
beer” and another for “best brewing innovation”. Unfortunately, there was no prize money.
After winning the award, Todd started thinking about how they could turn their new beer into a big
commercial success, and actively marketed the new beer, which he decided to call “Gum Drop Ale”.
Zac was less interested in the business side of things but was happy to keep refining his recipe and the
fermenting process. Zac thought Todd would eventually lose focus and was doubtful that Gum Drop
Ale would be a big success. However, at the same time, Zac was quite happy to try to make some
money doing something he enjoyed.
Over the summer break, they continued operating out of Todd’s Dad’s shed to refine the brewing
process for commercialisation. In the first few weeks of the summer break, Zac spent most of his time
in the shed working on the brewing process and doing experiments with eucalyptus and fermentation.
Todd spent that time marketing and networking. For one such marketing venture, Todd gave free beer
to all the guests at his brother-in-law’s office Christmas party. Todd’s brother-in-law, Denton, is a big
shot lawyer. Both Todd and Zac attended the party.
At the Christmas party, Todd was approached by Klaus who is the director of a beer and wine
distribution company. Klaus was interested in negotiating a supply contract with Todd, and arranged
a meeting with Todd in January.
Todd, sensing a big commercial break, decided to lease a section of a warehouse to give the business
a professional feel and so that there was enough room to increase production. Todd entered into a
one-year lease agreement, which he negotiated orally with the owner of the warehouse. Todd
borrowed $10,000 from his Dad to pay a security bond, and three months’ rent in advance.
When Zac saw the new premises he said: “cool … our new lab ” but didn’t ask anything about the lease
or rent. The next day Zac moved the brewing equipment and his laptop (which contained files outlining
the brew recipe and formulas for his innovative fermentation process) to the warehouse.
At the end of January, a number of problems arose:
– Todd discovered that Zac had been selling some beer to Zac’s family and friends, and Zac had
kept the money to himself. Todd confronted Zac on this. Zac responded by saying: “It’s my
invention I can do what I want … you don’t own me.”
– Unfortunately, the negotiations with Klaus fell through and Todd wasn’t able to strike a deal. The
business didn’t have enough money to pay the rent.
– Zac and Todd received a letter from Denton’s law firm informing them that they were being sued
for $50,000. It turns out that the beer supplied at Denton’s office Christmas party was defective,
and all the guests got sick. Denton suffered reputational loss and is blaming Todd and Zac.
After all this, Zac decided that he no longer wanted to take part in the business. Zac met with Todd at
the warehouse and said:
“Sorry bro … but I am totally over this …. I am out.”
Todd was furious and responded:
“You can’t do that, we have rent and bills to pay. I can’t cover these expenses without your
help …. You can’t just quit!”
Zac ignored him and started loading the brewing equipment and laptop into his car. While this was
happening, Todd yelled at Zac and said:
“that property belongs to the business, you can’t just take it. At least give me a copy of the
recipe and formulas!”
Zac continued to ignore Todd, finished loading his car, made a rude gesture at Todd and then drove
off.
Zac and Todd are not best friends anymore.

Based on this information, you need to use the IRAC method to answer each of these questions:
A. Does a partnership between Todd and Zac exist? In the “A- Analysis/Application” part of your
answer, make arguments both for and against the existence of a partnership.
For questions B-F, you should assume that a partnerships does exist.
B. Is Zac entitled to the money from the beer he had been selling?
C. Who is liable to pay the outstanding rent?
D. If Denton successfully sues1 Zac and Todd, who is liable to pay the compensation?
E. Can Zac leave the partnership in the way he did?
F. Is the brewing equipment, Todd’s laptop, and recipe and formula partnership property?
4) Hints
– Answer each question separately using the IRAC method
– The “Issues” have been broadly identified for you in the questions. You need to think about
how to clearly phrase them in your answer and also what facts are relevant to those issues.
– Before attempting to answer the questions, read the Partnership Act and identify the
relevant sections. You should start with the relevant legislation. Case law can be added to
the analysis where it assists with your interpretation of the legislation.
– Do not quote large sections of the legislation or cases. As a guide, only quote the most
pertinent aspects. You should keep long quotations (three lines or more) to a minimum.
1 You do not need to address the issue of whether Denton can successfully sue Todd and Zac. For the purpose of this
question please assume that he can. You can also assume that Todd and Zac do not have any insurance which would cover
them against the claim.
– Please have a look at the marking rubric on the following page. Your assignment will be
marked in accordance with this guide.
– Word Limit Breakdown Guideline:
o Question A – Approx. 500 words
o Questions B-F – Approx. 200 words each
– Please also remember that references in the footnotes are not included in the word-count.
Practical Legal Problem Analysis
Criteria F P C D HD Comments
Issues No attempt to deal with
issues separately.
Some attempt to
separate issues.
Most issues separated. Some
attempt to articulate issues
concisely.
All issues addressed
separately. Some attempt to
articulate issue clearly
All issues clearly separated
and identified. Issues
articulated clearly and
concisely with appropriate
use of headings.
Rules Does not correctly identify
any legal rules or all legal
rules are incorrect or
irrelevant to the issue in
question.
Identifies some
relevant legal rules
correctly and
relevantly.
Correctly identifies relevant legal
rules for most issues.
Identifies relevant legal rules
for all issues. Use of
legislation and case law.
Comprehensively identifies
relevant legal rules (including
both legislation and case
law) for all issues.
Application/
Analysis and
Conclusion
No linkage between rules
and facts.
Minimal, or unclear links
made between
components of rules and
facts. Analysis present but
unclear.
Some clear linkages between
facts and rules. Some
inaccuracies and/or lack of detail
in use of facts. Relevant
conclusion.
Components of relevant
rules applied with links to
specific facts. Some minor
inaccuracies. Relevant
conclusion flowing from
analysis.
Components of most
relevant rules accurately
applied with links to specific
facts. Minimal or no
inaccuracies. Relevant and
persuasive conclusion
flowing from analysis.
Writing Words consistently used
inappropriately or
inaccurately. Spelling and
grammar consistently
inaccurate. Sentences and
paragraphs lacks coherent
organisation or structure.
Meaning significantly
compromised.
Some words used
inappropriately or
inaccurately. Spelling
and grammar contains
inaccuracies. Some
sentences and
paragraphs lack
coherent organization
or structure. Difficult
to read. Some of the
meaning
compromised.
Minimal words used
inappropriately or
inaccurately. Spelling and
grammar generally correct.
Most sentences and
paragraphs are structured
but lack precision. Transition
between ideas mean reading
lacks efficiency and fluidity in
places. Meaning is generally
ascertainable.
Minimal words used
inappropriately or
inaccurately. Most spelling
and grammar correct.
Sentences and paragraphs
generally well-structured.
Transition between ideas is
logical and reading is mostly
efficient and fluid. Meaning
is mostly clear throughout.
Appropriate and accurate
word choice throughout.
Spelling and grammar
correct. Sentences and
paragraphs well-structured.
Transition between ideas is
logical and reading is
efficient and fluid. Meaning
is clear throughout and ideas
expressed are persuasive.
Referencing –
AGLC
No clear attempt to
reference work.
Work referenced but AGLC
incorrectly applied and/or
overuse of quotes
Demonstrates appropriate
use of footnoting broadly in
accordance with AGLC.
Some inaccuracies and/or
overuse with quotes.
Appropriate and
accurate footnoting in
accordance with AGLC
but with minor issues.
Minor inaccuracies with
quotes.
Appropriate and
accurate footnoting in
accordance with AGLC.
Appropriate use of
quotes.