Business Law and Ethics Report: UoS BA Business, Module Analysis

This report provides a comprehensive overview of key concepts in business law and ethics. It begins by examining the roles of the three main organs of government—the executive, judiciary, and legislature—within a governmental framework. The report then delves into the legal remedy of specific performance, discussing its limitations as imposed by the courts, using case examples. A comparison between partnerships and companies is presented, highlighting their differences in terms of legal structure, liability, and management. Finally, the report explores the ethical considerations surrounding employee dismissal, outlining the legal grounds for dismissal under the Employment Relation Act of 1999, including capability, conduct, redundancy, and other substantial reasons, all within an ethical perspective. The report includes relevant references to support the discussion.

BUSINESS AND LAW

Contents
PROJECT 1...........................................................................................................................................3
Role of three main organs of government..........................................................................................3
Remedy of specific performances and its limitation imposed by the courts.......................................3
Difference between partnership and company...................................................................................4
Employees can be dismissed at law under the ethical perspective.....................................................5
REFERENCES......................................................................................................................................6

PROJECT 1
Role of three main organs of government
In case of government, the role of executive stated that they had to manage the day to
day operation in country in respect of imposing the accurate norms which is designed by the
government. As executive not carry the power to make the laws or interpret them to make
changes. This role is to enforce the laws and also maintain them to work in routine manner.
Usually in the meeting of the government, the role of executive is played by the cabinet or
council of minters who only carries the power to execute the laws (Roach, 2018). Thus, they
executes the decision made by the parliament and also had to follow the order without
bringing any conflict in implementing such laws. They carry the power is respect of
appointing the federal judges to perform their duty in respect of providing the fair decision to
parties.
In respect of The Judiciary, the role of government in this aspects is relating to the
administrating the justice by depending upon the nature of the law. It is stated that they carry
the right to provide fair decision to parties whose right are violated under the civil and
criminal matters. Their role is to hold the good government and also maintain peace, order
and justice in the cases (Leyland, 2016). They mainly focus on three major role such as firstly
safeguarding the right of the parties in respect of undertaking and managing the fundamental
rights. Secondly, it is related to making new laws when there is majorly necessary to amend
the existing laws. By this aspect, they ensures that such laws are properly imposed on and
also in case of violation of any such laws, they carry the right to take strict actions. Third role
is relating to carrying the rights to appoint the officers whom they deemed fit to provide
justice to person (Mance, 2018). In respective of country, their main role is in a democracy
which manages the court system in respect of imposing right laws on particular matters.
In relation to The Legislature, it is stated that they carry the power to make new laws
or amend the existing laws by viewing the condition or situation of bringing new laws in
country. They are mainly contracted with the executive and judiciary system in respect of
implementing the stated laws for the stated cases. By examining the position of the
legislature, they also given additional powers in respect of collecting taxes or declaring the
war and also making strategies to secure the nation from this impact (Williams, 2017). The
major rights which they enjoy is relating to making the government and also manages the
work which is attained by government must be as per their set instruction.
Remedy of specific performances and its limitation imposed by the courts
Specific performance refers to the equitable remedy which is undertaken on the bases
of giving rights to the parties to perform the contract and also perform as per the set
instruction. As country order for performing specific performances in limited cases, if they
find that parties are in need of performing the contract and making the contract valid or
suffering from any damages (Shortall and et.al., 2018). This is explained with the case of
Nutbrown V Thornton (1805) 10 Ves 159, in which the claimant entered into the contract
with the defendant regarding purchasing the machinery which is rarely available in market.
But the defendant refused to perform the contract, in this case the court ordered from
performing the specific performances of the contract (Shin and Bae, 2018). The court limits
the order on the respective grounds such as if the damages are recovered from the

compensation paid by the defendant, in such case the court not order to perform the specific
performances. This is explained with the case of Cohen V Roche [1927] 1 KB 169, as in this
case the demands for specific performances is undertaken in respect of imposing strict rules
upon the defendant to perform the contract regarding selling of chairs. The court refuses to
perform such remedy as chairs are easily available in market.
Another limitation which is imposed in respect of type of contract which is made
between the parties. The country usually not order or accepts any order for specific
performances under the case of not performing the contract under the personal services. As
court also order the party in respect of not issuing specific performances under the breach
committed in silences or misrepresentation (Lukose and Pandey, 2019). It is stated with the
case of Lamare V Dixon (1873) LR 6 HL 414 as in this case the breach committed regarding
not keeping the promise which is made between the parties. But court refuse to provide the
specific performance remedy under the case of silence or breach of not keeping promise. In
this case, defendant not claimed for the breach of not performing the contract as per the set
terms, as courts orders that the promise is not kept by the person itself. Thus, court not order
for the specific performances under the grounds of not keeping promise which is made during
the time of contract.
Difference between partnership and company
Partnership firm is created when two or more partner agree to form the partnership
business and also such business is formed by registering the business under the Partnership
Act, 1890. In this act, the partner are liable to sign the partnership deed in which they agree
with all the terms and condition mentioned in the partnership agreement (Kaur, 2017). In
respect of undertaking the matters related to separate legal entity, partnership firm is not the
separate legal entity from the partners (Partnership or company, 2020). As partner itself had
to bear the risk in respect of facing any such issues. It is also stated that if there is death of
any partner, it results in dissolution of the partnership business. The liability of the partner are
limited in respect of providing protection to them (Iacobucci, 2018). But in case of facing
losses, every partner are personally liable to pay debts in respect of recovering the losses
from any negative aspects.
Company refers to the limited liability in which the company is liable to pay debts
and thus it not carry any responsibility upon the members to pay the debts. Thus, company
refers to the single legal person or also known as body corporate which carry the liability to
make the contract with its directors and other staff (Bower, 2018). Company carries the
separate legal entity in which the liability of the members are limited to the amount of shares
held by them. The main advantages of this business is that in case of any death of any partner,
the business continues to survive and also carry its activities for longer way. It the discussion
is related to the management of the business, it is stated that it is essay to identify the task of
the manager and directors. As particular task, duty and responsibility is assign to particular
person working in company (Khoteeva and Khoteeva, 2017). Thus, it results in avoiding
confusion between the work accomplished and also in case of breach committed, it is easily
identified by examining their work assigned.
Employees can be dismissed at law under the ethical perspective
Under the employment relation act, 1999 it is stated that this law is imposed in respect
of building the strong relationship between the employer and employee regarding working

under the guidance imposed by the superiors. In respect of dismissal, employer carry the right
in respect of undertaking five major aspects in which the employees can be dismissed such as
firstly capability or qualification (Phelps and et.al., 2017). In this case the law provides the
liberty to the owners in respect of dismissing any person if they feel that the person is lacking
in achieving any task or not carrying any particular knowledge to undertake such task. The
owner carry the liability to dismiss such person on grounds of lack of capability and
qualification to perform such task. Another aspects is relating to the conduct, as if the owner
find that the employee carry the capability to accomplished such task but due to
unwillingness to carry such task, owner can dismissed him from the job (Bowie, 2017). It is
also stated that when employer find that employee is committing any gross misconduct, then
also he can be dismissed from the job.
Third aspects is relating to redundancy in which the employees are dismissed
regarding there is no needs of the person to carry the job for longer way. As this is the right
of the business to dismiss the employees on such grounds but the person is liable to serve the
notice period for the stated time period (McHanwell and et.al., 2020). The fourth matters is
related to where there is continued employment would contravene the law, in this the right of
dismissed are undertaken in respect of not carrying any breaks and also doing the duty as per
the set instruction (Dismissal, 2020). In this case the employer carry the right in respect of
dismissing such person, if they feel that the person is not present during the time of working
hours in office. Last factors is relating to some other substantial reason in which they feel that
the employees is undertaken the task for some other company during the regular working
hours of the existing company (Harriss, MacSween and Atkinson, 2019). Dismissal is also
undertaken when the pressure from third party is undertaken and such pressure is fair to
dismiss the employees on certain grounds.

REFERENCES
Books and Journals
Bower, D. J., 2018. Company and campus partnership: Supporting technology transfer (Vol.
8). Routledge.
Bowie, N. E., 2017. Business ethics: A Kantian perspective. Cambridge University Press.
Harriss, D. J., MacSween, A. and Atkinson, G., 2019. Ethical Standards in Sport and Exercise
Science Research: 2020 Update. International Journal of Sports Medicine. 40(13).
pp.813-817.
Iacobucci, G., 2018. Swedish company launches NHS partnership in bid to enter GP app
market. BMJ: British Medical Journal (Online). 363.
Kaur, A., 2017. Law relating to public private partnership a comparative study between India
and UK with special reference to infrastructure sector.
Khoteeva, M. and Khoteeva, D., 2017. Public-private partnerships: A solution for
infrastructure development in the UK? Case study of the London Underground
public-private partnership project. International Review of Management and
Marketing. 7(1). pp.300-308.
Leyland, P., 2016. The constitution of the United Kingdom: A contextual analysis.
Bloomsbury Publishing.
Lukose, L. P. and Pandey, S., 2019. PROTECTION OF CELEBRITY RIGHTS-A
COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF RELEVANT IPR LAWS IN US, UK AND
INDIA. 지지지지지지. 14(2). pp.87-124.
Mance, J., 2018. The frontiers of executive and judicial power: differences in common law
constitutional traditions. Asia Pacific Law Review. 26(2). pp.109-126.
McHanwell, S. and et.al., 2020. The legal and ethical framework governing Body Donation
in Europe-A review of current practice and recommendations for good
practice. European Journal of Anatomy. 12(1). pp.1-24.
Phelps, K. and et.al., 2017. Withdrawal of ventilation at the patient's request in MND: a
retrospective exploration of the ethical and legal issues that have arisen for doctors in
the UK. BMJ supportive & palliative care. 7(2). pp.189-196.
Roach, K., 2018. The Separation and Interconnection of Powers in Canada: The Role of
Courts, the Executive and the Legislature in Crafting Constitutional Remedies. J. Int'l
& Comp. L. 5. p.315.
Shin, C. and Bae, J., 2018. Current status of the pilot-scale anaerobic membrane bioreactor
treatments of domestic wastewaters: A critical review. Bioresource technology, 247,
pp.1038-1046.
Shortall, O. and et.al., 2018. True cowmen and commercial farmers: exploring vets’ and dairy
farmers’ contrasting views of ‘good farming’in relation to biosecurity. Sociologia
Ruralis. 58(3). pp.583-603.

Williams, M., 2017. Legislative language and judicial politics: The effects of changing
parliamentary language on UK immigration disputes. The British Journal of Politics
and International Relations. 19(3). pp.592-608.
Online
Dismissal. 2020. [Online]. Available through:
<https://www.personneltoday.com/employment-law/dismissal/>.
Partnership or company. 2020. [Online]. Available through: <
https://www.netlawman.co.uk/ia/partnership-or-company>.