Enterprise Law Assignment: Business Entities, Contracts, and Analysis

This Enterprise Law assignment presents a comprehensive analysis of business entities and contract law within the Australian legal framework. The assignment addresses two primary scenarios: a dispute between business partners (Joel and Rebecca) involving issues of contract law, trade practices, and liabilities arising from business operations; and a breach of contract case between Tanya and Bentley, exploring the consequences of failing to fulfill contractual obligations. The assignment further includes short answer questions that examine contract formation and offer, acceptance and consideration using real world examples. The solution explores the application of relevant legislation, case precedents, and legal principles to resolve the issues presented. It provides a detailed discussion of the legal responsibilities and potential liabilities of the parties involved, offering a clear understanding of enterprise law concepts and their practical application.

ENTERPRISE LAW
1

Table of Contents
Question 1: Business Entities.....................................................................................................2
Question 2: Contract..................................................................................................................3
Question 3: Contract Short Answer Question............................................................................5
References..................................................................................................................................7
2

Question 1: Business Entities
Issue
The issue is associated with two specific individuals namely Joel and Rebecca. The two
individuals have started a business together. A conflict happens between them upon some
random incidents. Rebecca has turned up for legal advice.
.Rules
Enterprise law is a vast topic and includes multiple aspects within it. Enterprise law discusses
some of the most effective element if the organizational framework in Australia such as
Contract Law, Trade Practices, Constitution Law, Negligence Criminal Law and Partnership
Law. It can be identified that this specific case is multiple with multiple critical aspects
associated with it.
Application
Rebecca and Joel started a business together following after completing their studies.
Following a steady market research, a business plan was procured by the two persons. The
business idea with about a online flower company named by fusion flowers. $50,000 was
recently funded by Joel through whom he contributes as a primary capital. Rebecca tends to
contribute her tools, vans and equipment. They agree to lease a space for small warehouse
space to operate the business. The associated business tasks have been divided by Joel and
Rebecca. Joel was responsible for picking flowers from the Flemington market while
Rebecca will be responsible for solving al the enquiries from the customers for undertaking
the deliveries. The Profits will be divided 50-50 in this scenario (Sappideen et al. 2018). The
first two weeks of operation seems to be alight. However, after a fortnight of the business it
was very difficult for them to keep up their orders. In order to solve this problem, they have
decided to hire Matthew. In the next few days, Joel ordered some very rare species without
asking Rebecca. He believed that he hd the ability to sell those flowers. However, Rebecca
was not willing to indulge in such activities (Ong, 2018). Ooh Orchids have been overdue
$1500. While driving the flowers to a delivery, Matthew crashed the car to another car. This
caused $5000 compensation to the business. Hence without making any consult with Joel,
Rebecca started a separate business supplying flowers to wedding. However, the two
concerned person previously discussed that they would deliver flowers to the wedding
industry together. Rebecca has multiple potential liabilities as she violated multiple sections
3

of Enterprise Law within the Australian Context. Firstly without consulting Joel Rebecca has
started a separate business that violates the contract aw. The contract law in Australia states
that a person can never start a separate business in the similar industry without informing his
or her partner in that specific business. However, Rebecca has violated this policy and started
a spate business. Joel and Rebecca primarily discussed that they will eventually hut the
wedding industry due to lucrative nature of supplying. On the other hand, another liability
Rebecca has is that she forced the driver to get the delivery on time. Due to exert pressure
from Rebecca, the driver rushed and caused an accident (Gunningham and Sinclair, 2017).
Therefore, as the owner of the organization, Rebecca holds the primary liability to
compensate the affected driver. However, for the first case, Rebecca is not liable at all. It can
be identified that Rebecca did not know about the orders given by Joel about some rare
orchids. Therefore, as a co-owner of the business, Joel is responsible for the outstanding
invoice of $1500.
It can be identified that a number of legislations can be applied in this scenario. Contract
Law, Trade Practices, company Law issue and constitution Laws can be integrated within the
course of this study. Trade practice is a primary policy that can be applied in this scenario.
According to the Australian trade practice, a person must have to implement specific service
within the context of the study. Rebecca has to pay multiple associations associated within
the context of this study. Joel has violated the practice and given orders without informing
Rebecca which is against the regulatory activities. Therefore, the claim of the Ooh orchid
against Rebecca is not justified (Galsworth, 2017). Joel is completely responsible to pay the
dues of the respective organization. On the other hand, being the owner of a company
Rebecca is liable to pay the cost for the damage of other vehicle owner. Being an employee,
Matthew is not liable to pay anything as it was never mentioned in the employment
agreement that the employee would be liable in case of any damage caused within the
company. Besides, without informing Joel Rebecca has started a separate business that
reaches the contract agreement between Rebecca and Joel. Hence Rebecca is liable to pay
Joel a steady compensation to identify the solution (Wills, 2017).
Conclusion
Rebecca is responsible for some damages of the company and liable to pay some debt of the
company. On the other hand, in some cases, there is no responsibility of Rebecca and the
complete responsibility goes to Joel.
4

Question 2: Contract
Issue
The issue is associated with a contract breach between two people namely Tanya and
Bentley. Tanya have opt for legal aspect in this scenario.
Rules
Australian Contract Law is primarily governed for regulating multiple authorities within the
regulatory context of Australian Law. Contract Law tend to encompass regulations and laws
directed towards managing promises that are certain. In Australia, contract law is primarily
governed by common Law (Brown, 2018). There are multiple aspects associate with it such
as contractual formation, content and scope of the contract, performance and termination of
contract and remedies for the breach of contract. The consumer law section is an important
aspect of contract law. Consumer law ensure the protection of consumer against unfair terms,
fake promises and unconscionable conduct (Symes, 2016). Australian Contract Law is
associated with multiple aspects that are required to be managed within the context of this
study. This case can be considered under the breach of contract law (Berns, 2018). It falls
under the Competition and Consumer Act 2010 and Trade Practices Act 1974
(Cth) [historical], It also violates the Fair trading policy in Australia that is which is relative
in this domain (Butcher v Lachlan Elder Realty Pty Ltd 218 CLR 592, [2004]).
Application
This case is associated with the conflict between Tanya and Bentley. Tanya tends to live in a
smaller town in the southern region of the New South Wales. The respective individual is an
avid fan of Beefy spicy who is the member of the ban Spicy Boys. When she heard that they
are coming to Australia for a concert, she immediately bought a ticket for the show in
Sydney. She has decided to be chauffer driven from her home to Sydney and back on the day
of concert. For this reason, she have contacted Bentley Limo service she described all the
details and shared much information with the respective organization. She wanted to be
driven on and back by stretch Limousine of Bentley. Bentley agreed to the job on $1500
dollar. At the day of event, Tanya reached to Bentley’s House and found that Bentley had left
for another job that is more profitable to him. Tanya failed to go to the concert that day. Next
morning Tanya found out that her seat has been selected as a door prize winner and was to
get a signed photograph of the group which approximately priced near about $9000 dollars in
5

the collectible market. Tanya is seeking advice about the damages she can claim against
Bentley.
The above mentioned legislations can be applied to Tanya’s claim over this particular
problem (Whincop, 2017). Tanya identified that she faced multiple damages due to this
unprofessional activity of Bentley. The contract laws and regulations are quite transparent in
the Australian context (Spencer et al. 2017). Bentley had to be available for taking Tanya to
the event at any cost as have already agreed to do so. But he did not do that just because of
greater profit. It is unethical and not a professional attitude at all It can be seen that due to
Bentley’s unprofessional attitude, Tanya had to compensate financially as well as emotionally
which cannot be fulfilled. As they were agreed to have the service together, Bentley was
liable to take Tanya to the location which he failed to do (Crawford-Spencer, 2015).
Therefore, it is a breach of contract that resulted in Tanya’s ultimate los in this total
incidental context, Tanya has been very upset and now wants a compensation from the
respective authority which can be claimed through address the relative legislations in the
contract law and corporate law. In similar cases, court has suggested that the business owner
would be liable to give compensation to the consumer for their damages due to the breach of
contract (Palmer, 2015).
Conclusion
With the help of this particular study, it can be concluded that Tanya has not done any wrong.
Instead, she believed in Bentley who did not played his part properly. Therefore, Tanya can
claim compensation from the respective companies (Meltzer et al. 2018). This problem needs
to be addressed within the course of the study.
Question 3: Contract Short Answer Question
i.
In this case study, the primary aspect is the listing posted by Jeremiah (Stewart et al. 2016).
The listing was for a 30 year old maple tree that should be transported as the roots of the
species are shallow. In the reply of Abdul, he states that he is prepared to pay $450 for the
tree but will not be able to pick it up until 20 March (KerinS, 2018). Jeremiah asked him to
pay $450 and remove it by 15th, Abdul says, he can remove it on 15 March but he will pay
$350 dollars (Antonius et al. 2015). Jeremiah wants at least $375 to make a deal. In this case,
an enforceable contract can be created if the considerable person wants to buy the tree in
6

$375 Dollars. There are certain clauses from both the parties. Therefore, all the clauses must
be considered before creating a contract in this scenario (Hristov, 2017).
ii.
Bianca is the second respondent who called Jeremiah to tell him that she is interested in the
tree. For this reason, they arranged a meeting (Ranieri, 2016). Bianca have sent he tree and
after walking silently for 10 minutes she will take it in $450 dollar and will remove the tree
by 10th of march. Therefore, upon contacting her again, a contract can be created in this
scenario.
iii.
Mason is the third respondent to the listing of Jeremiah (Mika et al. 2017). He mailed
Jeremiah late night and told him that he will buy the tree in $500 dollars and pick it up on %
march. However, he mailed him the net day that he is not interested in buying the tree as he
realised that he has no room for it (Buck et al. 2016). Jeremiah did not see the second mail
and agreed to the first mail. Therefore, in this case, the agreement has not been reached to
create an enforceable contract. However, word of mouth plays an important role in relation to
contract law. Therefore, all the regulatory aspects are needed to be taken into account in this
scenario (Bandara et al. 2018).
iv.
Stephen called Jeremiah but Jeremiah did not answer the phone. She leaves a message to
Jeremiah that she is on the way with $500 and 5 tree removals. He also told her that she will
keep the $500 under the doorstep if Jeremiah is not home. In this case, if Jeremiah sees the
message, they can make an agreeable contract as it is fulfilling all the needs provided by
Jeremiah on that listing (Mason and Barraket, 2015). However, legislative undertakings
should be handled carefully in this scenario.
7

References
Antonius, N., Xu, J. and Gao, X., 2015. Factors influencing the adoption of enterprise social
software in Australia. Knowledge-Based Systems, 73, pp.32-43.
Bandara, W., Bailey, S., Mathiesen, P., McCarthy, J. and Jones, C., 2018. Enterprise Business
Process Management in the public sector: the case of the Department of Human Services
(DHS) Australia. Journal of Information Technology Teaching Cases, 8(2), pp.217-231.
Berns, S., 2018. Women Going Backwards: Law and change in a family unfriendly society.
Routledge.
Brown, R.A., 2018. Chinese business enterprise in Asia. Routledge.
Buck, T., Kirkham, R. and Thompson, B., 2016. The ombudsman enterprise and
administrative justice. Routledge.
Butcher v Lachlan Elder Realty Pty Ltd 218 CLR 592 [2004] 218 (CLR), p.592.
Crawford-Spencer, E., 2015. Deriving meaning for social franchising from commercial
franchising and social enterprise. Journal of Marketing Channels, 22(3), pp.163-174.
Fehlberg, B. and Smyth, B., 2017. Binding Prenuptial Agreements in Australia: The First
Year. In Feminist Perspectives on Contract Law (pp. 137-152). Routledge-Cavendish.
Galsworth, G.D., 2017. Visual Workplace Visual Thinking: Creating Enterprise Excellence
Through the Technologies of the Visual Workplace. Productivity Press.
Gunningham, N. and Sinclair, D., 2017. Leaders and laggards: next-generation
environmental regulation. Routledge.
Hristov, N., 2017, July. Policy for Implementation of the Enterprise Architecture as a Tool in
Bulgarian Mod. In The University of Sydney,‘History, Problems and Prospects of
Development of Modern Civilization’The XX International Academic Congress (Australia,
Sydney, 18-20 July 2017) PAPERS AND COMMENTARIES (Vol. 20).
KerinS, S., 2018. Social enterprise as a model for developing Aboriginal lands.
8

Mason, C. and Barraket, J., 2015. Understanding social enterprise model development
through discursive interpretations of social enterprise policymaking in Australia (2007-
2013). Social Enterprise Journal, 11(2), pp.138-155.
Meltzer, A., Kayess, R. and Bates, S., 2018. Perspectives of people with intellectual disability
about open, sheltered and social enterprise employment: Implications for expanding
employment choice through social enterprises. Social Enterprise Journal, 14(2), pp.225-244.
Mika, J.P., Warren, L., Foley, D. and Palmer, F.R., 2017. Perspectives on indigenous
entrepreneurship, innovation and enterprise. Journal of Management & Organization, 23(6),
pp.767-773.
Ong, D., 2018. Trust law in Australia. Federation Press.
Palmer, Q.C., 2015. The Law Reform Enterprise: Evaluating the Past and Chartering the
Future.
Ranieri, S., 2016. Extended Joint Criminal Enterprise in International Criminal Law: From
Foreseeability, to Intention, to Control over the Crime. The Journal of Criminal Law, 80(6),
pp.436-445.
Sappideen, C., O'Grady, P. and Riley, J., 2016. Macken's Law of Employment.
Spencer, R., Brueckner, M., Wise, G. and Marika, B., 2017. Capacity development and
Indigenous social enterprise: The case of the Rirratjingu clan in northeast Arnhem
Land. Journal of Management & Organization, 23(6), pp.839-856.
Stewart, A., Forsyth, A., Irving, M., Johnstone, R. and McCrystal, S., 2016. Creighton &
Stewart's Labour Law. The Federation Press.
Symes, C.F., 2016. Statutory priorities in corporate insolvency law: an analysis of preferred
creditor status. Routledge.
Whincop, M.J., 2017. Bridging the entrepreneurial financing gap: Linking governance with
regulatory policy. Routledge.
Wills, B., 2017. Eating at the limits: Barriers to the emergence of social enterprise initiatives
in the Australian emergency food relief sector. Food Policy, 70, pp.62-70.
9