Could you please help me with this question

Dazza is an electrician who subcontracts with builders around Perth to install electrical wiring systems on new buildings. Dazza has recently been subcontracted by Vaughan Builders to complete electrical wiring on one of their building sites in Midlands. Last week, the Vaughan Builders construction supervisor had gone to inspect another project in Fremantle. The construction supervisor allowed Dazza to continue with his wiring and left him as the only person working on the Midlands site. A delivery truck from WoodWorks Ltd arrived at the building site with a load of acoustic panels and the driver asked Dazza to sign for it. Dazza was a little hesitant at rst since he typically did not accept deliveries for Vaughan Builders and was only there to do the wiring, but still went ahead and signed for the delivery. Later that day there were reports of heavy rains around the Midlands area. Knowing that the acoustic panels could easily be damaged by water and needed to remain dry, Dazza rushed to the nearest Bunnings Warehouse and bought an extra heavy-duty tarpaulin for $800. Dazza used tarpaulin to cover the acoustic panels and protect them from the heavy rains that poured that afternoon. The next day when the construction supervisor arrived at the Midlands site, Dazza explained to him what happened and asked to be reimbursed the $800 he spent on the tarpaulin. Vaughan Builders has rersed to refund the $800 claiming that if Dazza had called the ofce or the construction supervisor they would have sent someone with a tarpaulin from one of their nearby warehouses. Dazza feels that he should be reimbursed since he acted to protect the acoustic panels from the rain. Required: Advise Dazza on whether he can get Vaughan Builders to reimburse him for the tarpaulin. Restrict your analysis to legal principles and cases covered in Agency Law only. (30 Marks) What is the Issue? What is the Relevant law? Apply the law to the facts: Conclusion