Renmin University of China Australian Contract Law Case Notes & Facts Essay
Question Description
AUSTRALIAN CNTRACT LAW
Regarding the reported decision of:
oOh! Media Roadside Pty Ltd (formerly Power Panels Pty Ltd) v Diamond Wheels Pty Ltd & Anor (2011) 32 VR 255.
2. Analyse this case having regard to the following question:
In oOh! Media Roadside Pty Ltd v Diamond Wheels Pty Ltd, the Victorian
Court of Appeal found that the contract was not frustrated. Would a
proponent of relational contract theory support this decision or is it
better explained with reference to the tenets of classical contract
theory (will theory)?
This question asks you to engage in a critique that identifies whether
the decision is consistent with the expectation of the courts role as
held by proponents of relational contract theory or whether the decision
is better supported by the principles underpinning classical contract
theory (will theory). You are expected to engage in an explicit
discussion of theory in your analysis with reference to the judgment to
support your response to the question.
3. Structure your critical case comment as follows:
theor(ies)/perspective(s) as it relates to the question. You must also
use the relevant tenets of the theory/perspective to critically analyse
the judgment; including explicit reference to the judgment to support
your argument.
Note well the critical analysis is the most significant to the skills
being tested by this assessment. We strongly recommend that you allocate
sufficient words from your word limit to explain and demonstrate your
critical analysis with reference to the question. You can use
subheadings should you wish.
"Place your order now for a similar assignment and have exceptional work written by our team of experts, guaranteeing you "A" results."