LAW1194 (Level 7) 2019-2020 Assessment
|Methods of Assessment||Problem Question|
|Outline Details||Essay or Problem question.
Problem solving to involve a contemporary case study in which knowledge, application, reasoning and effective communication are to be demonstrated. Essay-based questions for analysis and critical thinking.
|Last item of Assessment||Yes|
|Are students required to pass all components in order to pass the course||Yes|
Summative (Actual) Coursework
|Assessment Title||Weight towards final grade||Length||Due Date|
|Problem Question||100%||1,750||31 July 2020 (Friday)
Below is the summative coursework for Common Law Foundations LLM. You will need to submit your completed and anonymous coursework via the Turnitin link on the Common Law Foundations’ course page on Moodle.
What is expected from you?
James read an advertisement by a firm of London auctioneers to the effect that there would be held in London an auction sale “without reserve” of the famous Gatsby Painting Collection, valued by an independent expert recently at £250,000. He immediately booked a flight from Scotland to the auction rooms in London where the auction was to be held.
He was determined to get the Collection at any price, especially after catching sight of the artist himself at the sale. James was participating spiritedly in the bidding, which was reaching a very high level under the direction of the auctioneer, when Gatsby demanded that the auction cease since he could not after all bear to part with the paintings. The auctioneer immediately refused to accept any more bids (the last one had been made by James) and went on to the next item. James’s last bid was £150,000.
James brought an action against the auctioneers for breach of contract demanding £100,000 damages (representing the difference between the contract price and the market value of the lot at the date of the breach) on the basis that the advertisement to hold an auction without reserve constituted a unilateral offer to sell the Collection to the highest bidder and that such an offer was accepted by him when he bid at the auction. The County Court, however, found for the auctioneers holding that:
The decision was upheld by the Court of Appeal. James now wishes to appeal to the Supreme Court.
The following cases and statutes (available on Westlaw) were referred to in the courts below:
Warlow v. Harrison (1859) 120 E.R. 925
Johnstone v. Boyes  2 Ch. 73
Carlill v. Carbolic Smoke Ball Co  1 Q.B. 256
Williams v. Carwardine (1833) 2 L.J.K.B. 101
Barry v. Heathcote Ball & Co (Commercial Auctions) Ltd  1 All E.R. 944
Harris v. Nickerson (1873) L.R. 8 Q.B. 286
Payne v. Cave (1789) 3 Term. Rep. 148
Fenwick v. MacDonald Fraser & Co Ltd (1904) 6 F. (Court of Sessions) 850
Section 57(2) of the Sale of Goods Act 1979
You are asked to write a concise piece of legal advice advising James of his chances of a successful appeal to the Supreme Court. Your advice should not exceed 1,750 words in length (excluding your bibliography). If you exceed the word limit by more than 10%, you will be penalised by up to 5% of the marks. Do NOT use footnotes or endnotes – all case citations (and other references) should be included in the body of your advice. Your work should be word-processed and contain a detailed bibliography with full citations. Your advice should be supported by relevant case law and statutes (where appropriate). Plagiarism will not be tolerated, do not copy anyone else’s work, or show anyone else your work. You are reminded that plagiarism includes purchasing model coursework from whatever source.
This coursework is designed to test the following legal skills:
Hand-in date: 31 July 2020 (Friday), by no later than 9AM (HONG KONG TIME). You must submit your work electronically via Turnitin. Do NOT hand in a paper copy.