Case Study A
Bonzi found a necklace while staying in a hotel that is owned by Alpha Corp.
A legal question arises from this scenario: to whom does the necklace belong? Which legal rules and principles you have studied in Unit 8 may be involved in answering this question? Explain them and show why they may apply. Are there any additional facts that would be required to be established before the legal issue can be fully resolved? What are they, why are they relevant, and how might they affect the question of ownership?
Identifies the type of property involved from a legal perspective and the legal decision to be made in relation to Bonzi
Identifies a legal rule which applies to people like Bonzi in the situation he finds himself
Identifies another legal rule which applies to original owners of found property which should be considered in answering the question
Identifies a third legal rule which applies to landowners like Alpha Corp. and should also be considered in answering the question
Lists further information which must be sought, or investigations made, before a decision can be reached and explains why this must be done based on the discussion above
Case Study B
MC Electric Inc sold circuit boards. Dortmund was the director of sales for MC Electric. His employment contract said he was responsible for managing the sales force of five employees, including promoting sales. Pricing decisions and overall sales strategy were the responsibility of the president.
In October, Dortmund was approached by GB Circuits Co, another supplier of circuit boards which had been asked to quote on a large order from a manufacturer of telephones, A-Tel. GB could not fill all the A-Tel order itself and proposed that MC should submit a quote for what GB could not supply and, if MC were successful, it would pay over 50 percent of its profits on the order to GB as compensation for giving the MC the opportunity to bid and the introduction to A-Tel.
Dortmund agreed to the deal with GB on behalf of MC. Subsequently, MC quoted and supplied 2500 circuit boards to A-Tel which were paid for. MC did not learn about Dortmund's agreement with GB until after receiving payment from A-Tel.
MC is reluctant to pay the 50 percent commission to GB and it is considering whether there is any legal basis upon which it could be argued that it is NOT OBLIGED to pay the commission.
Which legal rules and principles you have studied in Unit 8 may be involved in answering this question? Explain them and show why they may apply. Which facts given in this scenario are relevant to the legal issue raised, and why? How might they affect the legal position of MC? Do you think that MC might be successful in avoiding payment?
Identifies the legal question which will likely be raised by MC and the area of law which is involved in answering it.
Describes and explains two rules or principles of law that apply to Dortmund and his actions which should be considered in answering the question of payment by MC to GB.
Lists and analyzes the facts that are relevant to the legal principles mentioned above. Gives arguments for both sides on the question of payment using those rules and principles in relation to the facts stated and other facts which may be suggested as possibilities.
Comes to a conclusion based on the discussion above and justifies it. Explains any assumptions or assumed facts used in reaching the conclusion.