Sign In
Not register? Register Now!
Essay Available:
Pages:
4 pages/β‰ˆ1100 words
Sources:
Check Instructions
Style:
APA
Subject:
Law
Type:
Case Study
Language:
English (U.S.)
Document:
MS Word
Date:
Total cost:
$ 17.28
Topic:

Commercial Law: Legal Relationships

Case Study Instructions:

Due: After Unit 13
Length: 1200–1500 words
Weight: 10% of final grade
Format: Assignment files should be prepared using MS Word to allow your tutor to insert comments and feedback. If you do not have this software, contact your tutor to discuss whether other arrangements can be accommodated.
Instructions:
This assignment should be done after studying Units 12 and 13 and completing the quizzes for these units.
Complete both case studies.
Case Study A (50%):
Marlie carries on a business of selling new and used lamps. In 2009, she obtained an operating line of credit from the Bank of Nova Scotia. Marlie gave the bank a security interest in all her present and future assets. Jordan is a dealer in imported chandeliers. He and Marlie agree that he will give her possession of a dozen chandeliers to sell on his behalf. Marlie is not obliged to pay for the chandeliers unless she keeps them for more than 30 days. Marlie goes into default on her loan. The bank seizes all of her inventory, including the 12 chandeliers. Jordan finds out about the seizure and demands the chandeliers, saying that they are his, but the bank disputes this.
Is Jordan entitled to get the chandeliers back?
Structure your answer following the Marking Rubric below.
Marking Rubric
Marking Criteria Mark
1. In relation to the contest between the bank and Jordan, identifies the legal question in relation to the chandeliers, which is raised by the scenario. /10
2. Identifies and explains the possible legal relationship between Jordan and Marlie that may benefit Jordan and why it would benefit him. /10
3. Identifies the factual elements, which must be proved to show the existence of the legal relationship referred to above. /10
4. Analyzes the scenario to see if the factual elements referred to above are present. /10
5. Comes to a conclusion concerning the strength of Jordan’s claim based on the analysis above. /10
Total /50
Case Study B (50%):
Luke owns a lifeguard consulting company, supplying lifeguarding services to public and private schools in Edmonton. One of his female employees has made a complaint to the Alberta Human Rights Commission against Luke concerning gender discrimination and sexual harassment in the workplace.
The employee alleges that she and the other women lifeguards were recently forced to wear newly issued skimpy company bikinis instead of the previous one-piece suits while performing their lifeguarding duties. Those who refused would be given last choice on shifts (which, practically speaking, meant that they would be getting no shifts). The complainant protested to Luke but eventually gave in since it was too late in the summer to find another job.
Additionally, the employee claims that, since the female staff was forced to wear the bikinis, Luke drops in constantly for site visits. His visits with females are more frequent and much longer lasting than with male staff. In fact, it is alleged that these visits have earned him the nickname of “Leering Luke.” Several female employees have told Luke that they find his behaviour unwelcome and are uncomfortable wearing the bikinis.
Luke knows about his nickname but stands behind his policy. According to Luke, business has increased and, as a result, there has been more to “supervise” at each visit.
Explain the concepts of gender discrimination and sexual harassment. Identify facts in the scenario which may support the employee’s claim and consider what other unstated facts, if proved, might also provide support. Identify a defense that Luke may raise. State your conclusion whether the situation involved discrimination or harassment, referring to the relevant facts and the strength of the defense.
The following websites will help you with Case Study B:
Alberta Human Rights: Discrimination: https://www(dot)albertahumanrights(dot)ab(dot)ca/Documents/HR_in_AB_view-only.pdf
Alberta Human Rights Commission: Sexual harassments:
https://www(dot)albertahumanrights(dot)ab(dot)ca/publications/bulletins_sheets_booklets/sheets/hr_and_employment/Pages/sexual_harassment.aspx
Alberta Human Rights Commission: Bona fide occupational requirements:
https://www(dot)albertahumanrights(dot)ab(dot)ca/employment/employee_info/employment_contract/Pages/bfor.aspx
Structure your answer following the Marking Rubric below.
Marking Rubric
Marking Criteria Mark
1. Identifies and explains the legal descriptions (or definitions) of gender discrimination and sexual harassment. /10
2. Lists the facts that may tend to show discrimination or harassment and explain why they do. Suggests any other facts which are not stated but might be implied that also support the claim. /15
3. Identifies and explains a defense Luke may raise in relation to his actions. Suggests facts which are not stated but might be implied that undermine this defense. /15
4. Arrives at a reasoned conclusion based on all the facts and the strength of the defense. /10
Total /50

Case Study Sample Content Preview:
Commercial Law 13
Student's Name:
Institutional Affiliation:
Course:
Instructor:
Date:
Commercial Law 13
Case Study A:
1 The legal question concerning the chandeliers
The security interest Marlie gave the bank in her present, and future assets might not include Jordan's chandeliers that she is selling on his behalf. The seizure of the 12 chandeliers that Marlie possesses might be considered a wrongful act by the bank. The Bank of Nova Scotia has the right over Marlie's present and future properties. Could Jordan's chandeliers be part of these future assets considering Marlie's obligation to pay for them if she keeps them for more than 30 days? Or does it mean that Jordan could get his chandeliers back if they are indeed not part of Marlie's assets?
2 The possible legal relationship between Jordan and Marlie benefiting Jordan
Jordan and Marlie agreed that she would possess of a dozen chandeliers that she will sell on behalf of Jordan, a dealer in imported chandeliers. It means Marlie is not in full ownership of the chandeliers because they still belong to Jordan. Should they be under her full possession, then the Bank of Nova Scotia has a right to seize them. The fact that Marlie was selling these half dozen chandeliers alongside her new and used lamps does not make them hers. Based on this legal relationship between Jordan and Marlie, he could therefore request his chandeliers' return. By proving that the chandeliers are not Marlie's and that she was only selling them on his behalf would work for Jordan's good.
3 Factual elements proving the legal relationship
For Jordan and Marlie to prove the legal relationship between them, they have to prove their agreement, preferably documentation. It might not be enough to say that Marlie was selling the chandeliers on behalf of Jordan without having actual evidence. Jordan, who deals in imported chandeliers, could obtain documents or receipts that prove that he is the rightful owner of these items. He could also present an agreement that the two of them had before he could give Marlie the ownership of these items. If Marlie can prove that she was only selling the chandeliers based on an agreement they had and presenting the terms for this agreement, Jordan could get back his items.
4 Presence of factual elements
Based on the scenario given, it is clear that Jordan does deal in importing chandeliers. We are also told that he and Marlie had an agreement that he will give her possession of a dozen chandeliers. However, without tangible evidence that the two had a deal, it would be futile to ask the Bank of Nova Scotia to give back the chandeliers to Jordan. The only thing that would stop the bank from seizing the 12 chandeliers is if there is something to prove the legal relationship between Jordan and Marlie. As a defaulter, Marlie has a right to be heard should she need to confirm her inventory (Kulkarn, 2016). However, the bank has a right to seize everything under Marlie's custody, especially if there is nothing to show that she was only selling the chandeliers on Jordan's behalf.
5 Conclusion
Without the actual proof of an agreement, preferably written documentation, Jordan has limited chances to prove his case. His claim that the chandeliers...
Updated on
Get the Whole Paper!
Not exactly what you need?
Do you need a custom essay? Order right now:
Order

πŸ‘€ Other Visitors are Viewing These APA Case Study Samples:

HIRE A WRITER FROM $11.95 / PAGE
ORDER WITH 15% DISCOUNT!
Order Now