The following is HOW to get much further in your assignments: you should spend at least 3 hours studying this in the first 2 weeks of your course before you prepare for your assignments:
Chapter 2) Types of assignments
Chapter 3) Types of Questions
Chapter 5) Structure and Layout, Plagairism, Grammar and references
Look, if you do not understand what is going on, you just can't read your assignment questions and then think that you know where the answer lies and then start your research into that answer.
It's like setting sail without having read the map. You sail into the wrong direction and that's the end. Period.
By the time you realise your folly, if you did realise, you would run out of time. If you did not realise your folly , you would have sailed to America thinking it was India and called the American Natives Indians.
So at the barest minimum, before you even read your assignment , you would need to have a map, a mind map of the topics covered so far. And this means hard work first to create that mind map.
Once you have the map, you are in a much better position to know where to zoom in on.
If there was a short cut, this would be the one...sorry but its pretty long, so soldier on...
Chapter 2: Types of law assignments:
b) Individual Assignments
i)The usual mistake:
You cut the assignment up like pizza and dole it out. Then stitch it up in the end.
Each question is served with the intellect of one person. When we set Group Assignments , we set it at a higher level of difficulty. Therefore you are asking for trouble when you do each part alone and then stitch it up like a factory made shirt.
So please consider the more orthodox methods below:
There will always be someone who may drop the ball at the last minute , the smart one should be on standby to recover.
use google hangout http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7K06lHu4gDk&feature=related
For heaven's sake what'sapp or wechat is NOT for Group discussion.
There may be two types of questions in a Law Assignment
Jack and Jill went up the hill to fetch a pail of water, Jack fell down and broke his crown and Jill came tumbling after.
The above is known as a case question: make no mistake about this, if you do not follow a set style , you are likely to fail.
For more references : see
: I= Issue
To draw the closest similarity , it's like a math question that you have been doing all your life...
Example of a Math case question:
The circular carpet of the hotel lobby needs to be replaced as it is worn out. Find the area of the replacement carpet. Given its radius to be 7 m.
I=Issue: To calculate the area of a circle using the formula.
Rule or Applicable Mathematical Law : Area of circle = ∏r2
Application of facts to law:
Area of carpet = ∏ X 7 X 7
So now compare with the case question below:
Sample Great essays by students December 2017
Question Part 2:
Excellent A+ Grade Sample Answer
Business efficacy test is a term implied in fact into a contract to make business sense and the contract valid, when it is necessary and reasonable to do so. Terms can be implied in three ways including: implied by the court, by law, by customs.
Contract is divided into two
categories called express and implied terms. Express
terms are the terms explicitly agreed in writing or orally by the contracting
terms is the term which are not stated in agreement and expressly agreed to,
but it may implied into the contract by law as it is understood to apply and
its bring about business efficacy. Implication is done by the court, statute
and custom or trade usage, 3 ways.
efficacy test means the terms can be implied into contract if it is obvious and
necessary. It doesn’t mean that is reasonable or desirable. In other word, it
doesn’t make business sense without the terms.
case British Crane Hire v Ipswich Plant,
British Crane Hire (BCH) are sending a crane to Ipswich Plant Hire (IPH) before
signing in the contract as IPH say to BCH that they were urgently need it by
the phone conversation. But it was an accident on the halfway. IPH was to rely
on the contract is not successfully incorporated. In fact, the court implied a
terms to the contract and consider that was a business efficacy in the
situation. IPH is liable to BCH.
In the case Hutton v Warren, there was a farming field tenancy between the claimant and defendant.
The claimant had planted crop on the field and ensure that the crop can be
harvest. Before harvested, the tenancy was suddenly terminated by the
defendant. Defendant refused to pay the losses for claimant as the tenancy
agreement didn’t stated that defendant must pay for losses of claimant. In the
result, there was an implied terms as the terms are usually implied into the
farming tenancy contract. Defendant is liable to claimant.
In conclusion, business efficacy test are the implied terms
to help people get into a business situation. Look at the case above, all the
party are trying to escape the responsibility for paying losses are not
successful. It such a protection between both party in the contract.
Implication by the court is
the court will imply a term into the contract as it doesn’t make sense if the
terms are not state and it will bring business efficacy.
In the case The Moorcock(1889), there was no
express term state that wharf is a safety place to moor a ship. But, there was
an implied terms say that the wharf must be safe to moor the ship. In the end, owner
of wharf as liable to owners of ship.
In the case Liverpool
City Council v Irwin, Liverpool
city council didn’t do maintenance for his flats
as the agreement didn’t mention any obligation to repair. In fact, the court
imply a term as it was a reasonable care to maintain the facility
(i)Applying fact to law
There were no express terms in
the Rental Agreement stating that CC would provide trained personnel to done
dismantling and removal of tower cranes in a skillful and proper manner. As we
look into the case The Moorcock, the
court did imply a term into the
contract as it was necessary and it doesn’t make sense if the term is not
imply. In this case, TC doesn’t provide a skillful worker to dismantling of the
crane in a properly way. It cause an accident and injured 3 SB’s worker. So,
provide a skillful worker and dismantling and removal of tower cranes in safe
and proper manner is understood term. In other words, the term must imply to
the contract by law and can’t ignore it.
CC will be liable to SB as TC
is a subcontractor of CC, anything TC do wrong CC will take responsibility for
it. SB can sue for damages even there
were no express terms stated.
Exemption clauses is the terms
which limit the liability of the party in breach who relies on the clause for
protection. When an exemption clauses was stated in an agreement and sign by
party, any exemption clause become incorporated even the party signing did not
In the case L'Estange v
Graucob, L'Estange could rely on
the exemption clauses as Graucob was signed in the agreement. Consequently, Graucob want to claim for her loss was
(ii)Applying fact to law
Rental Agreement entered into
between SB and CC, inside the agreement, clauses 6 already stated that “CC
shall not be liable or responsible for any direct or consequential loss
suffered by SB. It is similarly as case L'Estange v Graucob, the party who already sign in an agreement automatically become
incorporated. However, this case never tell us the agreement had been signed or
not, but we treat as normal. Normally entered an agreement and has some clauses
stated inside, we can consider the party has signed in the agreement. Once the
agreement has signed, CC can rely on the exemption clauses and SB can’t sue for
CC is not liable to SB. CC can
rely on the exemption clauses in the agreement which had been signed by SB.
If there are
any unusual factors such as misrepresentation about the scope and extent of the
exemption clause by the party relying on it, the clause will be invalid.
In the case Curtis v Chemical Cleaning, Chemical
Cleaning wanted to rely on the exemption clause but failed. That was a
mis-representation when Curtis sign on the receipt.
(iii)Applying fact to law
SB is a
company which specialize in the construction industry. CC is a company which
has master in renting and leasing out. Its mean SB and CC should be familiar
with the express terms, implied terms and exemption clauses in the Rental
Agreement of tower cranes. So, it’s considering no unusual factor such as
misrepresentation between Sb and CC that has limit the effectiveness of the
CC is no liable to SB as there
is no misrepresentation in the corporation. The exemption clauses is valid.
An exemption clauses seems to
form part of three contract based on the 3 factors, but it may neutralized by
Unfair Contract Terms Act (UCTA) which is protecting consumers entering into
business transaction. In Section 2(1), an exemption clause that excludes
liability for death or personal injury due to negligence is void.
In the case White v John Warwick,
the written agreement stated that "Nothing in this agreement shall render the owners liable for any
personal injury". In the end, the court held that
the exemption clause could not protect the defendant from being liable for
negligence as Section 2(1).
(iv)Applying fact to law
of the Rental Agreement already stated that CC are not liable to any losses
includes the injury of personnel. But according to the case White
v John Warwick, although the
agreement already stated there, if the negligence has cause personal injury or
death, then the exemption clause can protect the company are ignored. In this
case, 3 worker have been injured while the dismantling of tower crane process.
The exemption clause that can protect company liability are being ignored as
that negligence has caused personal injury.
CC is liable to SB as the Section 2(1) stated
that an exemption clause that excludes liability for death or personal injury
due to negligence is void.
Section 2(1) can set aside the
law of exemption clause if causes dead or personal injury. In this case, there
are 3 workers get injured so CC is liable to SB.
Crane Hire v Ipswich Plant Hire 
v Warren 
The Moorcock (1889)
City Council v Irwin 
v Graucob 
Chemical Cleaning 
White v John
Any person riding on any of the Magic Studios rides is deemed to have agreed to do so entirely at their own risk and hereby assumes all other risks thereto. Neither Magic Studios nor its employees will be liable for any death, injuries or financial loss suffered in connection with riding at all facilities of magic Studios.
While waiting for his turn, he asked the attendant what the above clause meant, he was told that it meant that Magic Studios will not pay for any death, injuries or loss of any items. Funster had been to rides all over the world and knew it was safe, especially in
When it was Funster’s turn to board the coaster, the attendant assisted Funster onto the seat and pulled the safety bar down in front of him. As Funster’s seat was pulled away, his shirt was jammed by the safety bar and tore. This was due to the attendant’s negligence in not taking care.
When Funster was halfway along the ride, a naughty cat jumped into the engine room and stopped engine when it was crushed by the moving chain. The safety feature device jammed the ride to a halt.
Whilst waiting for the coaster to resume, Funster had time to tug at the jammed shirt when the safety bar came loose! Before he could scream for help, the coaster started again and as it zoomed up the loop-de-loop , he was flung out and landed with a loud splash on the safety pond and broke several ribs and damaged his new iPhone 4S beyond repair.
Notes to students:
a) (There is no need to discuss in detail negligence elements and you may assume that there is negligence on the part of Magic Studios)
b) The case question must be analysed in the following formats:
c) If there are more than one Applicable Laws, the same format must be repeated for each applicable Law.
Right below is an example of a great answer done by DMS students which I have marked with an A**.
This student gave a general introduction on the area of Law concerned that would solve the case question.
The applicable Law is highlighted here, observe how cases are cited in support of the law and the proportion in this section about 40%
However, there are 2 cases which the court held that when reasonable steps are taken to bring notice to the other party, exclusion clause is valid. In Parker v South Eastern Railway Co., a ticket with words ‘see back’ on the face and exclusion clauses on the back was issued to the plaintiff. Parker was aware of the clauses but did not read them. (See also Thompson v LMS Railway Co.)
Teacher's comments: The conclusion should always state :
a) who is liable
b) and where applicable , for how much and how is this loss calculated.
Again the proportion here is approximately 20%
Here's the general marking criteria for case questions used for CAs as well as exams
llent = A
Adoption of a clear structure and format of answer
a) Applicable Laws,
b) Application of facts to Law
Clear usage, statement and explanation of relevant
Original and clear argument, Logical and convincing
discussion on Application of facts to Laws
Appropriate referencing (in‐text and list of
Number and quality of references
At least 5 for Individual Assignment and 10 for
Clear and comprehensive written style (spelling,
grammar, syntax etc) Please make sure you use
“Grammar and Spell check” functions to check your
c) Layout and Structure
Observe the sample essays below , they are organised into IRAC style, well paragraphed, structure for clarity.
d) Grammar and spelling.
With the availability of grammar and spell=check functionality, poor grammar and spelling is now seen more as a motivational issue than an issue concerning your cultural background.
In short , I accept no excuses.
B) DMS Student sample : Result A+
Applicable Law: approx 40% of the words used
(i) Applicable Law
Teacher's comments :
Do note that the facts of the case question do not appear in this section at all, they will be addressed in the next section Application of Fact to Law.
(i) Applying fact to law
(ii) Applicable Law
(ii) Applying fact to law
(iii) Applicable Law
(iii) Applying fact to law
(iv) Applicable Law
(iv) Applying fact to law
C) DMS Student sample : Result A+
Teacher's comments :
The following information is found on the website of the Inland revenue Authority of Singapore (IRAS)
The below CA happens to be the best mark I have ever awarded to any student in my four years teaching the DMS programme.
Koh Tat Wei, Edward
E) DMS Student sample : Result A+
Applying Facts to Law
Teacher's comments :
Applicable law 4
CA1 April 2013 :
I have therefore assembled this from two student's work:
So here is the best assembled answer for April 2013:
Teacher's comments: most of the students missed out the Part in red.
Follow the logic below: most students except this one gave this answer as Condition, partially right. But this term is in fact an Inominate term because when the employee absconds it is not known at the time of contracting whether the company could have suffered a minor or major loss. But once the employee has absconded, we will know the what extent the damage is.
If it is a serious one, you have breach of condition-like effects , a minor one then warranty-like effects.
Teacher's comments: Most students missed out UCTA s 2(2)
Most students missed out the above