Bruce, a builder, agreed to

renovate a house for Lula for $200,000. The works were meant to be finished

by March 2024. Lula was very keen for the work to be completed on time as

she had already agreed to sell the house to Popeye, who would move in on

1 April 2024. Indeed, Lula would need to pay heavy penalties to

Popeye for each day’s delay from 2 April onwards.

Bruce commenced work and

not long after realised that due to unexpected disruptions in the supply chain

for raw materials, he would not be able to complete the renovation works on

time. Bruce approached Lula and asked for some additional time.

Lula refused. Instead, Lula

offered to pay an extra $50,000 if Bruce finished the work by the due date.

Bruce accepted and the work was then completed by the due date.

Which of the following

statements is 

Matilda has a written contract with a builder,

Juan, to build a new factory for $5,000,000 by 30 November. Juan calls Matilda

in March and says that he can no longer build the factory for $5,000,000 as his

costs have gone up. Matilda orally agrees to pay an extra $500,000.

What can Juan do to ensure that the promise to

pay the extra money is enforceable against Matilda?

i. Juan should get Matilda’s

promise in writing along with his signature.

ii. Juan should promise to do

some additional work, such as building a shed behind the factory.

iii. Juan should get Matilda’s

promise in a deed.

iv. Juan does not have to do

anything as a contract can be oral and is not required to be in writing.

On 10 August, Beatrix offered to sell Bill a

katana (a type of samurai sword), via email, for $20,000. Beatrix’s email

stated that the offer was to remain open until 8:00pm on 15 August.

On 13 August, Beatrix sold the katana to Pai

Mei.

On 14 August, Bill sent Beatrix an email

accepting her offer. Later on that same day, Beatrix sent Bill an email telling

him the bad news – the katana had been sold to Pai Mei.

Is there a contract between Beatrix and Bill?

Tintin advertised a $1,000 reward for the return

of his lost dog Snowy. Asterix reads the advertisement and, later on, he finds

Snowy and returns the dog to Tintin.

Which of the following statements is CORRECT?

Giorgio visited the showroom of Hot Ovens Pty

Ltd to purchase a new pizza oven for his restaurant. He finds a suitable heavy

duty commercial-grade-gas-fired pizza oven on display. The manager tells

Giorgio that the oven is on special and is for sale at $25,000. Giorgio replies

that he needs some time to think about it, and the manager says he will keep

the offer open for a week.

After two days, the manager contacts Giorgio and

tells him that they are revoking the offer as they have sold the oven to

someone else.

Which of the following is CORRECT?

Homer, the CEO of Green Leaves (an organic farm

business), has been negotiating a contract with Marge, the owner of a fruit

shop, for the supply of spinach. Last Tuesday Homer sent the following email:

‘Dear Marge, following our previous conversations, we wish to sell you 50 kilos

of spinach for $500’.

The day after, Marge replied: ‘Dear Homer, I

wonder whether you would consider payment in instalments.’ Homer did not reply.

Two days later, Marge decides to accept Homer’s

offer and replies: ‘Ok. I understand – let’s do business for $500 upfront’.

However, Homer had already sold the spinach to a third party and he refuses to

go ahead with the deal.

Which one of the following statements is MOST LIKELY CORRECT?

Imagine that section 6 of the Tax Return

Act 2024 (Cth) (the ‘TRA’) states:

• “If the taxpayer submits an

  inaccurate tax return, the taxpayer will be penalised with a fine equivalent to

  3 times the tax that they ought to have paid.”

The TRA was passed for the purpose of

preventing tax underpayment.

Homer, a man of high integrity who is

nevertheless sometimes a bit naive, has been charged with submitting an

inaccurate tax return under the TRA and the Australian Taxation

Office is seeking a penalty under section 6. Homer stated a personal tax

liability of $30,000 when it should have been $20,000 (meaning that he actually

should have paid a lower amount of tax).

Which statement or statements is (or are) most

likely to be 

i. Homer’s lawyer will rely on

a literal interpretation of the TRA.

ii.  The ATO will seek to rely

on an interpretation of section 6 of the TRA which follows the purposive

approach.

iii. Homer’s lawyer will likely

argue that if we look at the purpose of the TRA, her client did not breach

section 6. In this sense, this section should only apply to cases

concerning tax underpayment (i.e. the rule does not cover cases about

overpayment).

iv. The ATO, arguing for a

literal interpretation of section 6 of the TRA, will argue that Homer did

breach the provision and, therefore, he must pay the fine. They will insist

that section 6 of the Act does not distinguish between overpayment and

underpayment and, therefore, the penalty applies in either case.

Justice Jon Snow is a judge of the High Court of

Australia. His Honour has heard both sides of the case before him and is about

to make his decision. The lawyer for the plaintiff has cited a case from the

Supreme Court of Victoria, with very similar facts to the present case, in

which the plaintiff won the case.

Which of the following statements about

precedent is

In relation to the ‘intention to create legal

relations’ requirement of contract formation, which of the following is 

Which statement or statements is (or are) INCORRECT?

i. Acceptance can be implied from the conduct of

the parties.

ii. Acceptance must be unqualified.

iii. Acceptance must be in writing.

iv. Acceptance must be communicated to the offeror.