LAWS19032 – Company and Association Law, assignment help

Our academic writers are ready and waiting to assist with any assignment you may have. From simple essays to full dissertations, you're guaranteed we've got a writing expert to perfectly match your needs.

Order a Similar Paper Order a Different Paper

 Case Analysis (1000 words)   15 marks

The following questions relate
to the case Montevento Holdings Ltd v
Scaffidi  [2012] HCA 48.
Students are
required to find the case  (*hint: go to and
to apply relevant legal theories in your answers.

Where is the case being heard?  (1 mark)

Who are the appellants and respondents in this
case?  (1 mark)

What jurisdiction is this court exercising in
this case?  (1 mark)

Where was the case heard before this?   (1

Identify the type of trust dealt with in this
case. Briefly define the role of such trusts.   (2 marks)

Who are the three parties in a trust? Identify
these three parties for this case.  

 (2 marks)

Outline the legal arguments being made by the
appellants.  (1 mark) 

What was the Court’s decision regarding
Montevento Holding Pty Ltd’s role as Nominee Trustee? 
 (1 mark)

Discuss the duties of a trustee. Was there a
breach of duties in this case?

 (3 marks)

10. Summarise the Court’s findings.  (2 marks)

Question (500 words)   5 marks

Joseph, Leon and Melanie are running
a café as a partnership. Whilst out shopping with his wife one Saturday, Leon
sees a coffee grinding machine which he believes would be perfect for the
business. He is unable to contact the other two partners on the phone but
proceeds with buying the coffee grinder anyway.

Discuss whether the partnership is bound
by the transaction that Leon entered into. Justify your answer
(2 marks)

The firm has two employees on a two-year
employment contract. Due to a slowdown in business, the three partners decide
that they need to fire their employees. 
(3 marks)

Essay Question
(2000 words)   20 marks 

  “After that… all that the directors do with
reference to what I may call the indoor management of their own concern, is a
thing known to them and known to them only

Hatherly in Mahony v East Holyford Mining
(1874-75), LR 7 HL 869 

analyse and contrast the common law and statutory indoor management rule with
reference to appropriate sections of the Corporations
Act (2001)
 and case law. Students
should also look at the limitations and exceptions to the use of the indoor
management rule.

Do you need help with this or a different assignment? In a world where academic success does not come without efforts, we do our best to provide the most proficient and capable essay writing service. After all, impressing professors shouldn’t be hard, we make that possible. If you decide to make your order on our website, you will get 15 % off your first order. You only need to indicate the discount code GET15.

Order a Similar Paper Order a Different Paper