Using ILAC Methodology in Essay and Case Study for Corporate/Business Law

In this essay we will discuss about ILAC methodology and below are the summaries point:- The text discusses the Doctrine of Separation of Powers and its importance in the Australian government. It explains the tripartite division of power and the responsibility of the executive in the legislature. The text emphasizes the need for the judiciary to be completely separate from both the legislature and executive.

Running Head: CORP /BUSS LAW
2Essay and Problem based
memorandum using ILAC methodology

2CORP /BUSS LAW
Table of Contents
PART A: ESSAY............................................................................................................................3
PART B: CASE STUDY.................................................................................................................6
ISSUE...........................................................................................................................................6
LAW.............................................................................................................................................6
Offer and Acceptance:..............................................................................................................6
Application...................................................................................................................................9
Offer.......................................................................................................................................10
Acceptance.............................................................................................................................10
Consideration..........................................................................................................................10
Intention..................................................................................................................................10
Conclusion.................................................................................................................................11
REFERENCES..............................................................................................................................12

Running Head: CORP /BUSS LAW
PART A: ESSAY
The differentiation of the power Doctrine is normally expected to be developed as the
core of a fair as well as viable government. On the contrary, liable government is integrated into
the constitution, balance legislatures as also the executive is united in a comprehensive way.
The Doctrine that advocates separation of powers has been able to get higher level of
focus in Australia owing to various aspects. The constitution of Australia embeds this doctrine
and as such forms a tripartite division of power which lies at the basis of the governance
procedure of the country. The reason line at the base of the development of the system is power
division of the government Trout Venus farms, rather than emphasising the whole over a single
company1. The latter construct the chances of increment of absolutism as it is not possible for a
single firm to practice the whole authority of a government. Separation of the powers is really
essential for the constitution of Australia.
A pattern of responsible governance is maintained in Australia whereby the principle that
states that executive have to be in charge of the Legislature in spite of the ministers being
members of Legislature as well as executive, is highly advocated. On top of that legislature me
present that power and legislation are to be delegated to Executive governance. The main area of
course in the Doctrine is that Judiciary should be absolutely unique and different from both
legislature as well as executive.
The doctrine of separation of power in the country, works towards dividing the Australian
government into three primary branches recharge judicial, legislative as well as executive. Firstly
legislature make the laws, which are incorporated into operation through executive and their
interpretation is done by the judiciary. Often, differentiation of power might be stated as that
1 Andrews, Neil. Contract law. Cambridge University Press, (2015).

Running Head: CORP /BUSS LAW
principle that makes a simple division of power, but side by side offers and integrated system as
well as process of checking and balancing. Furthermore checking is done in multiple forms one
most popular medium of which is a key responsibility of the Judiciary to ensure that proper
complaints is done by the legislature as well as executive2. On top of that the constitution of of
the Commonwealth also emphasizes the differentiation of power among legislative, executive as
well as judicial. Here it might be commented that separation of power has a unique relation with
Judiciary independence as well as rule of law.
Judges are having the denomination to conduct multiple orders in order to make the
decisions come into effect. For this the power differentiation principal relies on the way there by
9 gives power as well as authority to the Government of Australia. This shows that the Austrian
government acts in reasonable as well as accountable manual to formation of checking and
balancing on power usage for best interest of public and common good. Power is differentiated
among three principal branches by segregating the authority and this is a balancing is intended to
ensure that none of the person in the group of governance emphasise absolute power, thereby
showing that power is mutually spread and not one main branch is having the full of it.
The Parliament receives power with the responsibility of making as well cementing loss
as well as the compositions that are consistent up with the queen, the House of Representatives
as well as the senate. Next executive power with responsibility of putting law in 2 action and
hundred the consistency of the queen, other ministers including the Prime Minister. In
subsequence, power is provided to judiciary which responsibility of making judgements
regarding laws and Judiciary incorporates high court as the other Federal courts.
2 Aroney, Nicholas, and James Stellios. "Rights in the Australian Federation." (2018).

Running Head: CORP /BUSS LAW
Section 64 transformation Australia makes it mandatory to consider the ministers to be
sitting parliamentary members who are absolutely liable to the parliament. The constitution
integrates the legislature and the executive in an effective manner, and the same is mentioned in
the sections 44, 62 and 64 of the Constitution3.
There are different responsibilities of every element.
Firstly Parliament, the governmental body which is chosen by the Australian citizens is
accountable for law debates and passing of law which will call string as well as control the
executive as well as public overall. The executive that consists of ministers as well as other mass
public servants holds responsibility applying the laws as well as involve in daily governmental
operations. Judiciary which is equipped with Independence holds the duty to remain impartial
and obliged to proper interpretation of the laws. The liability of the united governance is
checking and balancing and also to ensure that the three pillars of power are communicating and
working in a balanced as well as natural environment. It should be emphasized that in the rule of
law differentiation of power is a unique component and the constitution wholly as well as impact
fully preserves as well as protects it. Developing and Furious intention of the Constitution by
founding father has been subjected to further alteration by means of the decision of high court
and the certain cases which are provided by the high court only. For that time when
Commonwealth Federation has considered to emphasise above the states, and continue doing the
same and the Constitution Act of the Commonwealth of Australia paper sizes the framework of
power differentiation, coincidence of ingenuity of the legislative executive and the judicial is a
stark fact.
3 Douglas, James, Eleanor Atkins, and Hamish Clift. "Judicial Rulings with Prospective Effect in Australia." Comparing
the Prospective Effect of Judicial Rulings Across Jurisdictions. (Springer, Cham, 2015). 349

Running Head: CORP /BUSS LAW
Hence, differentiation of power can be referred to differentiation of the Government and
responsibilities into each of the branches for the purpose of restricting any of the heads from
practicing all the key functions as well as the operations of the other also4. Power division
medium passages to avoid conglomeration of power parallely offering for seeking and balancing.
PART B: CASE STUDY
ISSUE
Issue in the context of a given case is linked with them existence of a valid contract with
both qualities, namely Event Management Limited as well as Rigby corporate function Planners
Pty Ltd.
LAW
The comment principles specified in the contract law emphasize that all contracts are
supposed to be relevant as well as valid, so long as they are evident. In the context of the contract
law of Australia, the following elements should remain there for the purpose of a compulsory as
well as suitable contract.
Offer and Acceptance:
According to the rules offer is supposed to be exact as well as conventional. Acceptance
need to be reasonable and timely it was be communicated with the offering agent.
The principal objectives concerning the parties are development of a lawful binding
connection. In contrast the parties linked to the contract have the relation of having the purpose
4 Gregory, Charles. "Judicial independence in Australia: Contemporary challenges, future directions [Book Review]."
Bar News: The Journal of the NSW Bar Association Spring 2016 (2016)74.

Running Head: CORP /BUSS LAW
to go through officially binding agreements. Generally it is noticeable that the presence of
deliberation should be compulsory evidence to any existing contract.
The Rose and Frank Company versus junior Crompton and Brothers Limited case
emphasizes on some dominating decisions which year wholly based on the contract law in
context to beach the aim to develop legal relationship of commercial arrangements have been
framed. For this particular case, significant dissenting has been provided by Court of appeal that
had been availed by the House of Lords5.
In this particular case there is no chance of the arrangement come into effect and being a
legal agreement it is also not a memorandum written and hereby it is also not liable to
legalization and the the court of law. The court’s decision held that the impugned close had been
ineffective and also proclaimed that the present a document was actually one binding contract
pertaining to legal terms and which was enforceable by the high court also.
It is important to pay a Consideration for the assurance made. Hereby, consideration
refers to the amount of money paid to the other parties on behalf of the promises that they made.
However, something worthy, although the word should not be measured only in the monetary
form. This consideration might be in the form of some right, interest, advantage of the other
party, some patience, liability or loss that has been issued by other parties6. Moreover it is not
essential that the necessary consideration which should be equivalent to the market worth. One
important consideration in this context is that the consideration is supposed to be sufficient, but
not adequate.
5 Hunter, Howard. "Modern Law of Contracts." (2017).
6 Mark Tushnet,. "Comparative constitutional law." The Oxford handbook of comparative law. (2017).

Running Head: CORP /BUSS LAW
The case of Carlill vs Smoke Ball Company can be highlighted here. In this case in the
court found one advertisement including some terms meant for deriving constituted reward
which has been binded and unilateral provide acceptable by anyone who conducted by its terms7.
The judgement of the court so that the advertisement was actually and unilateral offer made
publicly. On top of that, the meeting conditions for using the smoke ball included an offer of
acceptance, a simple usage of this smoke ball incorporated good consideration and it is also to be
considered that the individual buying it had relied on the political advertisement that highlighted
a benefit to the carbolic. The company claim that Ada position worth 1000 pound was done with
Alliance Bank and reflected that the primary intention was to become legally bound.
Capability of the parties to act lawfully: As per law it discuss about the people who are not
supposed to lawfully enter given binding agreements and it includes:
 Persons who are having mental impairment I supposed to have an impact upon their
aptitude for appreciating the contract
 Persons who are under pressure of alcohol as well as drugs
 Mind people aged below the age of majority should enjoy and except as per convinced
situation
 Insolvency or bankruptcy
 The companies can simply act in a manner that is distinct by its nature
So far as the Section 124 is concerned, it provides a similar legal capacity two companies
like an individual along with an authority to develop a contract. Moreover, the section 125
effectively holds that the performance of an act together with entry into one contract by means of
7 Peel, Edwin. Treitel on the Law of Contract. Vol. 414. (London: Sweet &maxwell, 2015).

Running Head: CORP /BUSS LAW
a corporation will be acceptable simply as it is father then the authority of establishment of the
company8.
A corporation can make one agreement through its widespread seal, as advocated by section
127 subsection 2 or during the time when a mediator is acting on behalf of it (Section 126)
henceforth the letter is a most simple technique and the section 126 gives the authority to an
individual who is acting on behalf of the company having indirect power to create, approve,
differ or discharge one agreement.
Legality of the agreement: this refers to a condition for one agreement to comply with any of
the official procedures. An agreement can be verbally made also. However convinced law
requires an agreement in writing for it to be enforced. For evidence: people relating to sale or
land deposition or and assurance.
Application
As per the given case scenario, it can be noticed that various fundamental elements of contracts
are missing such as certainty and agreement among parties. It is because the contracts were not
held in written among both the parties and plus, they were no consent. The parties did not agree
over lot of aspects only limiting to discussion that included staff leaving liabilities, intellectual
property transfer as well as the mechanism for informing the Rigby Corporate function planner's
majority of the clients.
Evaluation of important elements of the given case
Offer
8 Peter Gerangelos,. "Separation of powers in the Australian constitution: Themes and reflections." SAcLJ 29 (2017):
903.

Running Head: CORP /BUSS LAW
There is not supposed to be any viable offer as that has not been communicated with other party.
In addition some terms are not certain as well as complete9.
Acceptance
In the given case context, acceptance of the counter party is not there.
Consideration
In this particular case the configuration is viable since there is clear definition in the monetary
terms.
Intention
Parties are intended to develop legal contract however that has to be confirmed by any authorised
person since the companies are also involved in the same agreement
On top of that, only one draft was developed and the second party did not receive the same
also10. Therefore, it can easily said that there was no context related to validity in the same
contract, and the fact that supported it is that only a mere rough draft was prepared by the team
of event management and also it was not forwarded to the Rigby corporate function planners for
reviewing as well as for agreement and consent11.
Conclusion
Based upon the above analysis it can be complimented that there was no existence of any
contract absolutely between the parties due to lack of agreement between them12.
9 Poole, Jill. Textbook on contract law. (Oxford University Press, 2016).
10 Uhr, John. "The Performance of Australian Legislatures in Protecting Rights." Protecting Rights Without a Bill of
Rights. (Routledge, 2017).
11 Rasnic, Carol Daugherty. "The Constitution of the Commonwealth of Australia." International Journal of
Constitutional Law 14.4 (2016) 1038
12 Smits, Jan and et.al.. Contract law: a comparative introduction. (Edward Elgar Publishing, 2017).

Running Head: CORP /BUSS LAW

Running Head: CORP /BUSS LAW
REFERENCES
Andrews, Neil. Contract law. Cambridge University Press, (2015).
Aroney, Nicholas, and James Stellios. "Rights in the Australian Federation." (2018).
Douglas, James, Eleanor Atkins, and Hamish Clift. "Judicial Rulings with Prospective Effect in
Australia." Comparing the Prospective Effect of Judicial Rulings Across Jurisdictions. (Springer,
Cham, 2015). 349
Gregory, Charles. "Judicial independence in Australia: Contemporary challenges, future
directions [Book Review]." Bar News: The Journal of the NSW Bar Association Spring 2016
(2016)74.
Hunter, Howard. "Modern Law of Contracts." (2017).
Mark Tushnet,. "Comparative constitutional law." The Oxford handbook of comparative law.
(2017).
Peel, Edwin. Treitel on the Law of Contract. Vol. 414. (London: Sweet &maxwell, 2015).
Peter Gerangelos,. "Separation of powers in the Australian constitution: Themes and reflections."
SAcLJ 29 (2017): 903.
Poole, Jill. Textbook on contract law. (Oxford University Press, 2016).
Rasnic, Carol Daugherty. "The Constitution of the Commonwealth of Australia." International
Journal of Constitutional Law 14.4 (2016) 1038
Smits, Jan and et.al.. Contract law: a comparative introduction. (Edward Elgar Publishing, 2017).

Running Head: CORP /BUSS LAW
Uhr, John. "The Performance of Australian Legislatures in Protecting Rights." Protecting Rights
Without a Bill of Rights. (Routledge, 2017).