LAW500 Business Law Research Report
Assessment Information and Rubric
| Subject Code | LAW500 |
| Subject Name | Business Law |
| Assessment Number and Title | Assessment 4 –Research Report |
| Assessment Type | Individual |
| Length / Duration | 2,000 words maximum, no ±10%, and excluding references |
| Weighting % | 30% |
| Total Marks | 100 |
| Submission | Online Submission via TurnitIn for the written report and Excel file(s) |
| Due Date | Weeks 11, Midnight, Sunday at the end of the week. |
| Format | A written report in Microsoft Word format |
Assessment Description and Instructions
The purpose of this assessment is to provide students with an understanding of business law related concepts. Student will do deep dive analysis on business law concepts.
In business, accountants, managers and financial analysts are required to understand how businesses or a particular business operates.
Businesses today require that their employees can work in teams and collaborate to produce more innovative solutions, compared to what an individual can produce.
Late Penalties
Late penalties apply at the rate of 5% of the assessment mark per day late, to a period up to five days after the due date of the assessment.
Study Support
This assessment will be discussed in workshops.
It is required that students come to workshops prepared with work they have completed so that they can ask relevant questions to assist their group in completing this assignment accurately and on time.
Academic Integrity? Link to Policy here or academic integrity module?
It is student’s responsibility to ensure that you demonstrate academic integrity. Take the time to find out more by visiting PIA’s Policies and Procedures site.
By submitting your assessments, you acknowledge that this is your own work – that you have undertaken the assessments yourself and without any assistance from any other person or any website or other resources which are not specifically permitted. Also, you have not shared any aspect of your assessments or answers with other students or provided assistance to them in any way.
Assessment description:
Critically discuss the regulation of “unfair terms” in contract law. You are required to use case law and ACL to elaborate this statement. Please follow Harvard references along with report structure to complete your report.
Please see link below as a sample template. https://www.newcastle.edu.au/ data/assets/pdf_file/0008/333773/LD-Report-Writing-LH.pdf
Law500 Assessment 4 Marking Rubric – Research Report (30% of the total mark)
| Marking Criteria | HD (High Distinction) 85-100% | D (Distinction) 75-84% | C (Credit) 65-74% | P (Pass) 50-64% | F (Fail) 0-49% |
| Criteria 1 | Demonstrated a sophisticated understanding and knowledge of the legal concepts Makes unclear and/or incoherent and/or insufficient argument in response to the question. Structure of argument difficult to discern | Demonstrated highly developed understanding and knowledge of the legal concepts Makes clear and sound argument in response to the question. Structure of argument discernible | Demonstrated thorough understanding and knowledge of the legal concepts Makes clear and well developed argument in response to the question Structure of argument discernible and well developed | Demonstrated satisfactory knowledge of the legal concepts Makes clear and sound argument in response to the question. Structure of argument discernible | Demonstrated no or little knowledge of the legal concepts Makes unclear and/or incoherent and/or insufficient argument in response to the question. Structure of argument difficult to discern |
| Legal Concepts | |||||
| and Capacity to | |||||
| make a strong | |||||
| argument in | |||||
| writing | |||||
| 40% Weighting | |||||
| Criteria 2 | Very strong articulation of relevant legal and/or policy issues Makes very advanced connections between the detail of legal and/or policy issues and theory Advanced description of relevant theories. Advanced ability to explain key theories Very strong ability to critically analyse and apply theory | Strong articulation of relevant legal and/or policy issues. Makes advanced connections between the detail of legal and/or policy issues and theory Very good description of relevant theories Very good ability to explain theories Strong ability to critically analyse and apply theory | Correctly articulates relevant legal and/or policy issues. Makes in-depth connections between the detail of the legal and/or policy issues and theory Good description of relevant theories Good ability to explain theories Good ability to critically analyse and apply theory. | Correctly describes relevant legal and/or policy issues to a limited depth Confuses some legal and/or policy issues or shows significant gaps in legal knowledge Sound description of relevant theories. Sound ability to explain theories. Basic ability to critically analyse and apply theory. | Shows significant confusion or lack of understanding of relevant legal and/or policy issues. Poor description of relevant theories Inability to explain key theories Inability to critically analyse and apply theory |
| Identification and | |||||
| knowledge of the | |||||
| relevant legal | |||||
| and policy issues | |||||
| Critically analyse | |||||
| the nature of law | |||||
| by applying | |||||
| theory |
| 35% Weighting | |||||
| Criteria 3 Research 15% Weighting | Demonstrated substantial and extensive research by thoroughly supporting work with an adept selection and range of relevant sources. | Demonstrated substantial research by supporting work with a comprehensive selection of relevant sources. | Demonstrated substantial research by supporting work with a sufficient selection of mostly relevant sources. | Demonstrated a basic level of research by supporting work with an adequate selection of sources. | Evidence of research is missing or research lacks focus and/or have chosen unsuitable or fictitious sources, which do not support the work or link to the required assessment task. |
| Criteria 4 Structure, grammar and referencing. 10% Weighting | Logically and succinctly structured the content to create a cohesive and coherent analytical piece of work. Used plain English. Consistently adhered to grammar and punctuation conventions. No spelling errors. Accurately and consistently adhered to the Australian Guide to Legal Citation. | Logically structured the content to create a cohesive and coherent analytical piece of work. Used plain English. Generally adhered to grammar and punctuation conventions. Almost always adhered to the Australian Guide to Legal Citation. | Logically structured the content to create mainly descriptive piece of work. Occasionally used plain English. Mostly followed grammar and punctuation conventions. Mostly followed the Australian Guide to Legal Citation. | Partially structured the content into loosely-linked rudimentary paragraphs to create a comprehensible descriptive piece of work. Occasionally used plain English. Mostly followed grammar and punctuation conventions. Followed some of the Australian Guide to Legal Citation. | Partially structured the content. Used language that was difficult to understand or not suited for the task. Did not accurately proof read the work before submission. Only loosely followed the AGLC. |
Page 5 of 6
Page 6 of 6