这是一篇来自澳洲的关于简短的答案评估的作业代写
INSTRUCTIONS
There is no set format for this document just that it is set out clearly in 1.5 line spacing and a minimum font of 12.
Word limit is 2000. There is an acceptable 10% (+/-).
Word count exceeding 2000 (+/- 10%) will be penalised 5 marks per 100 words.
NOTE: Word count DOES NOT include headings and referencing
Late submission penalty – 5 marks per day for 7 days. After 7 days, any
UNEXCUSED submission will not be accepted.
If you feel you cannot complete your Assessment by the Due Date, please send the Course Coordinator an Extension Request.
Referencing must comply with Harvard (or AGLC if you are a law student).
You must include Case Law in your answers. There must be at least 1 case cited per answer. However, it is recommended you cite more Case Law per answer in order to have a more complete and substantive analysis.
Question 1A – Australian Privacy Principles
Robert has fatigue, body aches, chest pains and congested breathing. Also, the tips of his fingers and toes have started to feel tingly and turn a slight purple colour.
Worried that he might have a serious infection, he attends the Burnside Medical Centre to have a check-up.
The doctor thoroughly performs a physical exam on Robert. The doctor suspects that Robert may have an auto-immune disorder. However, before sharing this diagnosis with Robert, the doctor prefers to have some blood and urine results.
As a result, the doctor instructs the nurse to draw some blood and collect a urine sample from Robert.
Two weeks later, the results of the tests are in.
Robert makes an appointment to speak to the doctor.
During the appointment, the doctor indicates that the pathology results are in but are not conclusive.
Nevertheless, in examining Robert’s ANA test, there are some indications that he might have lupus.
Robert cannot believe the diagnosis. He has always been healthy and never had any indications of being ill with an auto-immune disorder like Lupus. And he has just boosted himself with the Pfizer vaccine, so he should be the healthiest he’s ever been.
The doctor gives a slight smirk at this remark and proceeds to write a lot of notes in Robert’s file.
When the consultation is over, the doctor gives Robert a copy of his blood and urine results.
Robert asks for the doctor to include the notes he made during the consultation.
However, the doctor refuses to provide this information. He says it is “confidential” and that
Robert has no right to see it.
Robert is now determined to retrieve those notes.
What type of information are the blood and urine tests considered in the Privacy Act?
(5 marks)
What Australian Privacy Principles can Robert use to retrieve the notes made during
his consultation? (5 marks)
(Total – 10 Marks)
Question 1B – Offer and Acceptance
Robert decides that he is going to hire a lawyer to help him to retrieve those documents.
He remembers a sign outside the office of a newly opened small law firm in Goodwood. It said that if a customer brought a clipping of their advertisement in the local paper, they could have a 1-hour consultation for only $10. Robert begins to search for the advertisement in the local paper but is unable to find it.
However, he is able to find the advertisement in the online version of the newspaper. It says:
Good Wood Lawyers
Grand Opening
Special Deal
1 hour consultation for only $10
If you have a copy of this advertisement
Robert prints the advertisement on A4 paper. He is unsure if the Lawyers will accept the printout. He calls the offices of “Good Wood Lawyers” to enquire if they will accept the printout instead of a newspaper clipping.
Robert asks, “is that deal in the newspaper true?”
Christina, the receptionist, answers, “yes, of course. The only condition is that you have the ad with you. So bring it along to your appointment and you’ll get the special price”.
Robert asks, “can I print out a copy from the online newspaper ad?”
Christina answers, “yes, that’s fine.”
Robert booked a consultation for 1pm on Friday.
Martin, the principal of “Good Wood Lawyers”, tells Robert that there was a mistake on the flyer and that is should have said 1 hour consultation for only $100”, not $10.
Martin tells Robert that he could not consult with him for only $10 since that would cause the law firm to lose money.
Seeing that Robert was a bit upset at this, Martin assures him that it was still a great deal at
$100 since, usually, a 1 hour consultation would cost at least $350.
Robert is furious since he was given confirmation that the deal in the newspaper ad was authentic from the receptionist. Robert wants Good Wood Lawyers to deliver on their promise to provide a consultation for $10.
Advise Robert on whether or not a Contract exists. Focus on Contract Law relating to Offer and Acceptance as well as the principles of Equity.
Remember:
Do NOT use Consumer Law for this scenario.
(10 Marks)
Question 1C – Exclusion Clauses
Upset and furious, Robert prepares to leave Good Wood Lawyers but his illness causes him to faint. Luckily, Martin is able to catch Robert before he falls to the ground.
Once Robert recovers and is able to talk, he explains to Martin that he wants to begin legal proceedings against Burnside Medical Centre.
Martin’s eyes light up. He also has some serious issues against the Burnside Medical Centre.
Martin’s sister had produced a natural remedy for auto-immune disorders. She had made a compound using only natural substances. The natural remedy, “Immune Reinforcer”,contained no pharmaceutical compounds. Instead, it used a mixture of Tumeric, Ginger,
Apple Cider vinegar, Flaxseed and Epsom salts.
However, the head doctor at Burnside Medical Centre filed a complaint with the Therapeutic Goods Administration against “Immune Reinforcer”. As a result, “Immune Reinforcer” is currently under evaluation and will not be available for commercial sale until the review process is complete. However, the review does not prevent private sale between individuals.
Robert asks if “Immune Reinforcer” actually works. Martin assures him that it’s a very good product. He then pulls out 2 bottles from his desk drawer. The bottles only have the front label with the product’s name.
Robert buys one of the bottles for $50. On the invoice, he notices an item at the bottom under a heading that says “Exclusion Clause”. However, the text under the heading has been smeared by the printer, making it unreadable.
Martin says, “sorry, our printer is on the fritz. Oh, and we’re still waiting for the manufacturer to send us the back labels that list the ingredients and possible allergens.”
Robert says, “that’s ok. I’m not allergic to anything so I’ll be ok”.
Robert goes home and takes two tablets of “Immune Reinforcer”. He then goes to sleep.
Later that evening, Robert wakes up with a burning sensation in his stomach. He runs to the bathroom and sees his reflection. He is covered in blisters and has a rash on his face.
In the morning, he calls Martin. Robert yells, “these pills you sold me have made me incredibly ill. I’m worse now than before. I’m going to sue you.”
Martin simply smiles and says “Go for it. You can’t do anything because I have an exclusion clause. It’s on your invoice.”
