Reference no: EM131395197 , Length: word count:2000
Company law Group Assignment and Presentation -
Learning Outcomes: On successful completion of this assignment, students will be able to:
- Recognise the laws relating to companies in Australia; and
- Examine the duties, rights and responsibilities of company officers
Case Options -
1. Forrest v ASIC (2014)
2. ASIC v Citigroup (2007)
3. Australian Securities and Investments Commission, in the matter of Sino Australia Oil and Gas Limited (in liq) v Sino Australia Oil and Gas Limited (in liq) [2016] FCA 934 (11 August 2016)
4. Stimpson, in the matter of Eagle Boys Dial-A-Pizza Australia Pty Ltd (Administrators Appointed) v Eagle Boys Dial-A-Pizza Australia Pty Ltd (Administrators Appointed) [2016] FCA 935 (11 August 2016)
5. Australian Securities and Investments Commission v CME Capital Australia Pty Ltd, in the matter of CME Capital Australia Pty Ltd (No 2) [2016] FCA 544 (16 May 2016)
6. Australian Securities and Investments Commission v Bilkurra Investments Pty Ltd [2016] FCA 371 (15 April 2016)
7. Australian Securities and Investments Commission v Astra Resources PLC [2015] FCA 759 (24 July 2015)
8. ASIC v Soust (2010)
9. North v Marra Developments Ltd (1981)
10. Fame Decorator Agencies Pty Ltd v Jeffries Industries Ltd (1998)
11. Gambotto v WCP Ltd (1995)
12. Northside Developments Pty Ltd v Registrar-General (1990)
13. Permanent Trustee Australia Ltd (as Trustee of Advance Property Fund) v Stout and Others (1999)
14. Nassar v Innovative Precasters Group Pty Ltd (2009)
15. McGellin v Mount King Mining NL (1998)
16. Beck v Weinstock (2013)
17. Kinsela v Russell Kinsela Pty Ltd (in liq) (1986)
18. ASIC v Hellicar (2012)
19. ASIC v Lindberg (2012)
20. Shafron v ASIC (2012)
21. ASIC v Healey (2011)
22. Vines v ASIC (2006)
23. ASIC v Adler (2002)
24. Brunninghausen v Glavanics(1999)
25. ASIC v Rich (2003)
26. ASIC v Parker (2003)
27. ASIC v Loiterton (2004)
28. ASIC v PFS Business Development Group Pty Ltd (2006)
29. Hall v Poolman (2007)
30. ASIC v Australian Investors Forum Pty Ltd (No. 2) (2005)
31. State of South Australia v Marcus Clark (1996)
32. ASIC v Vizard (2005)
33. ASIC v McDonald (No.11) (2009)
34. ASIC v NRMA (2002)
35. ASIC v Plymin (2003)
36. ASIC v Cyclone Magnetic Engines Inc (2010)
37. ASC v MacLeod (2000)
38. Biodiesel Producers Ltd v Stewart (2007)
39. AXA Asia Pacific Holdings Ltd v Direct Share Purchasing Corporation Pty Ltd (2009)
40. Wilson v Manna Hill Mining Corporation Pty Ltd (2004)
41. Wenzel v ASX Ltd (2002)
42. R v Rivkin (2004)
43. Kwok v R (2007)
44. Isak Constructions (Aust) Pty Ltd v Faress (2003)
45. Capricornia Credit Union Ltd v ASIC (2007)
Written Assignment:
Identify the facts of the case.
Explain the relevant law relating to the case.
Discuss the legal arguments raised by the parties in case.
Summarise the judgement of the case.
Illustrate the role, purpose and scope of the relevant court, or tribunal.
|
Possible for firms in a perfectly competitive market
: Briefly explain whether it is possible for firms in a perfectly competitive market to earn zero economic profit even if they have incurred a sunk cost upon entry into the market. Given an example of such a cost.
|
|
Use the counterexample method
: Use the counterexample method to prove the following categorical syllogisms invalid. In doing so, follow the suggestions given in the text.- All persons who assist others in suicide are people guilty of murder.
|
|
Identify the different technological innovations
: Using the organization (Apple Inc) that you researched for the Module One discussion, identify at least two different technological innovations that you associate with that organization. For each of the innovations, explain the types and patterns ..
|
|
Perfectly competitive market
: In a perfectly competitive market, all firms are identical, firms can freely enter and exit, and the market has an unlimited number of potential entrants. Now, the government starts collecting a specific tax t.
|
|
Discuss the legal arguments raised by the parties in case
: BBAL401 Company law Group Assignment and Presentation. Identify the facts of the case. Explain the relevant law relating to the case. Discuss the legal arguments raised by the parties in case
|
|
Price because of the shortage in a free market
: A) Using two separate supply and demand graphs, graphically show and verbally explain how a shortage is created by each of the two changes. B) Explain what eventually happens to price because of the shortage in a free market. C) Explain how supplie..
|
|
Does a wireless network present any health hazards
: Do the walls in the building present a problem for a wireless network? Does a wireless network present any health hazards?
|
|
Discuss about the types of topology
: Wireless communication, generally, useless three configuration topologies (1) point to point; (2) point to multipoint; and (3) multi-point to point. In this paper, (a) define each topology, (b) provide a scenario for using each topology, and (c) ..
|
|
Prove the given categorical syllogisms invalid
: Use the counterexample method to prove the following categorical syllogisms invalid. - All meticulously constructed timepieces are true works of art, for all Swiss watches are true works of art and all Swiss watches are meticulously constructed tim..
|