Case Analysis Question for the Corporations Act of 2001 Assignment in Business and Corporation Law


Task: Use the ILAC (Issues, Law, Application, Conclusion) structure to respond to the two problem-style questions below. A worked example of this format can be found in the Resources folder.

Question 1: Terence is a Charles Sturt University question majoring in jewellery design. Terry starts Terry's Terrific Designs as a business after graduating. Peter and Sara, who have both graduated from the CSU, work for him. Sara is hired as a designer, while Peter is named the supplies buyer. Sara and Terence collaborate on the design work. 

In each of the following circumstances, provide Terence with guidance while referencing pertinent legal authority:

Gabby requests a brooch be made for her when Sara visits her. Sara displays to Gabby images of a variety of her own ideas. Sara neglects to inform Gabby that she is Terence's employee. Sara's art impresses Gabby, who commissions her to create an elephant-shaped $1000 brooch. The following day, Terence calls Gabby and informs her that he has received her order and will complete the brooch within two weeks. "Who are you?" asks Gabby. Sara and I have a contrac.

Terence advises Peter to only purchase silver because the business has an excess of gold. Peter, on the other hand, is enjoying a drink with Mary, a gold dealer with whom he has previously done business frequently on behalf of Terry's Terrific Designs, and she makes the excellent offer to sell 50 grammes of gold for $1500. Terence accepts Peter's offer to buy the gold on his behalf, but when Mary shows up at his shop with the gold and demands $1 500, Terence declines to take the metal or give her the money.

Terence dismisses Peter on Monday as a result of him disobeying his order to refrain from purchasing gold. However, Peter's access to the company's email system is not terminated by Terence until Thursday. Gordon, a diamond vendor that Peter frequently worked with on Terence's behalf, contacts Terence on Friday. Gordon claims that Peter wrote him an email on Tuesday ordering a $5,000 diamond for the business store, which Peter picked up on Wednesday. Peter has vanished into South America and is no longer recognisable. Gordon is requesting payment.


Answer 1:

Issues: The following concerns were raised in this instance:

Is Sara legally justified in failing to disclose that she is working for Terry's Terrific Designs, and is Gabby correct in thinking that he had signed a contract with Sara? Is the agreement Peter and Terrance reached to buy 50 grammes of gold still enforceable, and is Terrance still responsible for paying Mary $ 1500?

• Does Terrance have any obligation to Gordan for the $5,000 that Peter stole from him when he was fired from his job prior to placing the order for the diamond?

Law: It is well established under the employment act that employees are subject to certain obligations placed on them by their employers, and that employers are likewise subject to certain obligations to avoid potential conflicts of interest for their own employers. However, as it reveals the employee's position within the organisation, employees are not permitted to disclose their job status to customers. As it is well established legislation that employees work for the firm, carry out their obligations, and enter into contracts on its behalf.