Foundations of Business Law in Australia - Assignment Example

FOUNDATIONS OF BUSINESS LAW IN AUSTRALIA Your name Subject Date 1.0 Jane situation in relation to Dan a) Identifying the issue Any business agreement or contract either documented or not need to be honored by all parties involved in such an agreement. Dan made a business agreement with Jane that the barn would be available for Jane to hold her birthday bash. The fact that Dan didn’t honor agreement breaches several business laws. Firstly, this is abuse of Jane’s personal rights and deprivation of information. Dan should have alerted Jane immediately that the barn has been rebooked so that she can look for another venue. Additionally, Dan seemed to prefer the businessmen more than Jane possibly because they may pay more compared to Jane. This amounts to business neglect and Jane can successfully sue Dan for neglect as well poor customer relations and service. Therefore, Dan is very unfair in the execution of this agreement between him and Jane. b) Applicable rules for these issues There are several applicable rules that apply to the above issues. They include: i. The Australian consumer law which allow rights to consumers and ensures that they are not cheated of their money by business people (Adamson and Morrison, 2011). This law puts businesses in check by ensuring that the consumers get the value of services or products they have paid for. ii. The trade practices act of 1974 encourages fair business between consumers and traders (Gilles, 2004). Similarly this acts postulates good relations between the two entities in ensuring that each entity is satisfied from the business relation. c) Relevant Authority Fairness in business relations: the parties involved in any business relationship should at all times be fair throughout the relationship such that each party commits to its ability to ensure that the other party is contented. In the above case, Dan could have provided an alternative for Jane who initially should have had a second option. d) Application The confirmation that Dan gave to Jane in full understanding that he was not fully committed in allowing Jane’s party in his barn was breach of the basic business and trade rules. Dan may not have liked the noise that may be brought by the party but that should not mean he should deny Jane the venue. Dan was very sure that Jane would wholly count on this assurance of party venue and went ahead to give it to other people in full knowledge of the effects that his decisions would have on Jane. Jane had already secured a loan to pay for the venue, booked entertainment detail for the party all because she had secured a good venue for the party. This is an indication that Dan has no business care to his clients and he is very selective in servicing his customers. This may not only have happened to Jane alone, it may also have occurred to other clients judging by the way Dan reallocated the barn to other customers. Though Jane should also have looked for alternative incase the promise by Dan didn’t materialize, the trust and business agreement that the two had was satisfying to Jane. e) Conclusion Jane deserves a better business care and Dan owes her a great amount of care considering the time that Jane took to secure the barn, the business trust that she has on his business relations as well as the after disappointment caused to Jane and her friends. 2.0 Jane situation in relation to Disco John a) Identifying the issues John had agreed to do the entertainment gig for her sister’s birthday party. The lack of venue that led to Jane cancelling John’s performance cannot be used as evidence not to pay John. According to John, this was a done a deal and legally it has to be honored. Jane may feel difficult to make this payment since no services were rendered. However, John was ready to make a show for the birthday party and its cancellation shouldn’t mean that the payment is also cancelled. There are rules that give guidelines on the amount of time that should be allowed or the termination of a service notice in which the no payment will be made for cancellation of an event (Carter, 2011). Though John has an opportunity to make half the amount that Jane could have paid, he still deserves his $1000 dollars particularly because he hadn’t made a decision for the guest appearance approach. b) Applicable rules for these issues The Fair trading act of 1999 indicates that both the service provider and service consumer should treat each other in fairness such that a fault in one side doesn’t cause harm to the other (McKendrick, 2012). This act protects businesses and service providers against consumers who make orders and fail to turn for payment or pick up (Stone, 2011). It also protects consumers against suppliers who may promise supply but fail to honor the supply even after payments have been done. c) Authority Settlement of fees agreed upon in signing a business or service delivery deal in which case the customer has to honor the deal by making payment for a service that was ordered irrespective of whether such service was really provided. However, there may be an agreement where the two parties may agree on the best way to share the costs of the services expected to be rendered but not rendered (Latimer, 2012). d) Application Jane approached John because he was sure that she had secured a venue and she knew that the venue would be available because she had found the money for the venue. However, the cancellation by of the venue availability by Dan meant that things had change and Disco John couldn’t make a performance. At personal level, John could have forfeited this amount considering that no service was provided but in a business level, Disco John may have taken time and resources to prepare for the party which was cancelled. In such a position, nobody could take anything less than the amount in the initial agreement. e) Conclusion Though John may seem a bit insensitive for services not rendered, it’s constitutional and in consistent of the law for business agreements to be honored. Therefore, John deserves his pay according to the agreement that he agreed to provide entertainment services for the Jane’s party. Jane shouldn’t take the disappointment from securing the venue to other engagements that she had made with other service providers. 3.0 Claims against Max for the poor sanitation and production of the beers a) Identifying the issue The law clearly states the accepted procedures for alcohol manufacture for corporation or individuals involved in the beer production (Gans, 2012). An error in beer production process can lead to tragic incidents including death, blindness among other effects that result from poor alcohol production. The use of improper materials for the production or using contaminated materials can also lead to terrible results. Max is therefore out of his duty of ensuring production of standard brew that is healthy-good. The disappointment that has befallen Janes friends, though cannot be entirely rested on Max, is to some degree a make of Max’s lack of keenness and adherence to accepted guidelines, laws and rules in product and beverage manufacture. Though Jane’s friends took a lot of beer, it can be successfully argued that there would be no harm to them had the beer bottles been well cleaned. b) Applicable rules i. The Australian liquor licensing act 1997 ii. The national measurement act 1960 iii. National trade measurement regulations 2009 The above acts and regulations guide the production, marketing, sale and use of alcohol related products in Australia. They give regulations on processes to follow, materials to use and people to consume the products (Burnett and Bath, 2009). They also provide penalties on people who breach any rule set aside to be followed in the industry. The above case would fit in all the three rules and be subject to penalties provided in each. c) Authority Payment of all damages caused by poor prepared brew: the person found to be in contempt of instituted laws that govern production of alcoholic substances is liable to pay all damages and be answerable to charges that may press upon him or her (Weatherburn, 2004). d) Application Jane contracted Max for the beer supply because she was convinced of a good service may be from recommendation or a previous same service provision. Jane deserved a good service because she had already made her contribution in terms of payment as per the agreement entered between the two. Though Jane could have inspected the beers before delivery and maybe before consumption, it’s the obligation of the service provider to ensure that he or she conforms to the set laws that govern the processes that the service provider is involved in. There are many simplified laws and rules in Australia that govern and direct the requirements for production of all types of beverages alcohol included. The poor sanitation in provision of the brew by Max and company can only be considered as negligence of the law and more legally, Max can be charged of attempted murder through food poisoning, breach of better customer relations and also cheating in a customer provider relationship where he provided goods not ordered by customer. e) Conclusion Max is wholly liable for the misfortunes that befell the Jackie and Philip; the missed exam, career opportunity and the hospitalization. Though the two friends may rest this on Jane’s shoulders for finding unfit supplier, the blame would legally rest on Max’s hands. Max is therefore liable for the misfortunes that occurred to Jackie and Philip. He is also liable for cheating to his customer for supplying substandard beer as opposed to what Jane expected for her party. Jane will therefore be legally right to demand the refund of her payment from Max and seek legal redress for the damages that the brew caused to her friends References Adamson J. & Morrison A, 2011, Laws for business and personal use. Cengage Learning, Mason. Barker D 2000, Essential Australian law. Taylor & Francis Group, New York. Burnett R. & Bath V 2009, Law of international business in Australasia. Annandale: Federation Press Carter J 2011, Cases and Materials on Contract Law in Australia. LexisNexis Butterworths Drahos P 2000, Global Business regulation. Cambridge University Press, New York. Gans J 2012, Modern criminal law of Australia. Cambridge University Press, Delhi. Gilles P 2004, Business Law. Federation Press, Annandale. Latimer P 2012, Australian business law 2012. CCH Australia Limited, Canberra. McKendrick E 2012, Contract Law: Text, Cases, and Materials. Oxford University Press, Oxford. Monohan G 2001, Contract Law. Taylor & Francis Group, New York. Radan P & Gooley J 2009, Principles of Australian contract law. LexisNexis Butterworths Sobel L & Biederman D 2003, International entertainment law. Praeger Frederick A, New York. Stone R 2011, The modern law of contract. Taylor & Francis, New York. Vickery R & Pendleton W 2005, Australian Business Law: Principles and Applications . Pearson Education Australia, Canberra. Weatherburn D 2004, Law and order in Australia: Rhetoric and reality. Federation Press, Annandale Read More