PART A–Case Study Analysis and ApplicationMonica owns a horse ranch in New South Wales where she breeds and trains champion horses. When one of the fences on the ranch was damaged in a recent storm,...

PART A–Case Study Analysis and Application

Monica owns a horse ranch in New South Wales where she breeds and trains champion horses. When one of the fences on the ranch was damaged in a recent storm, Monica hired Joe, a local builder, to remove and replace the broken fence.

During negotiations, Monica told Joe:‘I’m in a rushfor the fence to be fixed because we had to move the horse that uses that paddock, to a neighbouring farm for agistment. They are charging us $150 per day. If you agree to take this job, you have to get it done straight away with no delays.’

Joe agreed to take the job on these conditions and contracts were signed.

The next day Joe arrived at 6am and immediately removed the broken fence. Unfortunately, due to a scheduling error, Joe was not able to return toMonica’sranch to build the new fence until 3 weeks later. During that time, Monica paid a total of $3,150 in agistment fees to her neighbour and, unbeknownst to Joe, she also lost around $5,000 in expected income when she was forced to cancel all of her weekly horse riding lessons during the three week period.

Monica is furious and believes she has a right to terminate the contract and sue Joe for damages.

Q1) Refer to case law and discuss whether Monica has a legal right to terminate the contract and sue Joe for the $3,150 agistment fee for her horse. (6 marks)

(In your answer, you must refer to Luna Park v Tramways Advertising Pty Ltd and Associated Newspaper v Bancks and analyse whether the time for repairs to be carried out was a condition of the contract)

Kent Institute Australia Pty. Ltd. Assessment BriefABN XXXXXXXXXXCRICOS Code: 00161E RTO Code: 90458Version 2:18 July 2022 Page2of7TEQSA Provider Number: PRV12051

Q2) Refer to case law and discuss whether Monica can also sue Joe for the $5,000 loss she incurred after cancelling the horse riding lessons (6 marks)

(In your answer, you must refer to Hadley v Baxendale, and other cases related to expectation damages)

PART B–Theoretical Analysis and Critique Q3) 6 marks

In the closing comments of his2021 article titled, ‘Workplace Surveillance and Privacy’,1Peter Leonard stated,‘Workplace surveillance laws in Australia are a mess and not fit for purpose. Employers and employees deserve better. This should not be hard to fix if there is political will.’

Question: Over the years, the Federal, State, and Territory Governments introduced legislation aimed at protecting our right to privacy in Australia. Why then, despite these efforts, do academics like Peter Leonard believe employers and employees deserve better?

(Suggested discussion points will be provided during the Week 6 and 7 tutorials)