Each question is worth 25 marks. Please note that you are only required to address the issues stated in the question. Use the IRAC method to structure your answer and separate headings for 'Issue(s)', 'Rules', 'Application' and 'Conclusion'. A tolerance of at least 10% of the word limit will be allowed. No penalties for exceeding the word limit will be applied, but words exceeding the limit may not be read.Footnotes, endnotes or bibliography are not required but if you use them, bear in mind that they do not count towards the word limit.Question 1 (25 Marks). Annie made a reservation at "Frederico's" to meet some friends who she hadn't see for a while. While Annie was getting a drink from the bar, a waiter carelessly spills a tray of drinks onto Annie's expensive handbag, which she left on her seat. When she complains to the restaurant manager, he directs Annie's attention to a sign on the wall that states:'The restaurant takes no responsibility for goods lost, damaged or stolen'.Annie didn't notice the sign when she walked in because it was obscured by a large cactus. Meanwhile in the kitchen, Frederico the restaurant owner had decided to add a new range of taco dishes and salads to his menu. He had placed a large sign on the restaurant window promoting his mexican dishes as 'the best Mexican in town, made with all fresh ingredients!'. Marco, the owner of "Marco 's", the Italian restaurant next door, is rather annoyed about the sign. He has been serving freshly made pasta for years. Marco had noticed piles of empty tins outside in the parking area and accused Frederico of misleading customers. He thinks that Frederico uses tinned jalapenos in his dishes. Frederico's response is that even if the jalapenos are from a tin, they are fresh from the tin. Marco has now threatened legal action under s 18 of the Australian Consumer Law.Focus on the disclaimer and s 18 of the Australian Consumer Law (ACL).Is the disclaimer valid? Does the sign prevent Annie from suing the restaurant? Can Annie seek compensation? Is Marco entitled to bring such a legal action under ACL s 18? If so, is such an action likely to succeed?!!!!! Remember to use the IRAC method to structure your answer and separate headings for 'Issue(s)', 'Rules', 'Application' and 'Conclusion'.!!!!!!

Group Case-Law Summary (10%) Criteria\\Scale Outstanding Effective Basic Unsatisfactory Issue (25%) The area of law and the The area of law and the The area of law is The relevant area of law is The Issue section legal problem(s) to be legal problem(s) to be correctly identified, but not identified. identifies the relevant addressed is/are addressed is/are the statement does not legal problem(s) that identified and clearly and identified, but the clearly describe the legal need to be addressed completely described. description of the problem(s) that need(s) to problem(s) are not clear be addressed. or are incomplete. Rule (25%) All relevant legal All or most of the relevant Some identification of No relevant legal The Rule section principles are clearly legal principles and their relevant legal principles principles have been identifies the relevant explained and their correct source of but the correct source of identified. legal principle(s) adopted correct source of authority have been cited, authority (Section of Act by the court to address authority is given. but the explanation of the or relevant case) has not the legal issue principles is not clear or is been cited. incomplete. Apply (25%) The discussion is a clear The discussion considers The discussion considers The discussion of the facts The Apply section and comprehensive the application of most of some of the relevant legal does not refer to any explains the reasoning of analysis of the relevant the relevant legal principles but does not relevant legal principles. the court in applying the legal principles and their principles to the key facts, apply those principles to legal consequence of the application to the facts to but the arguments are not the key facts to support rule to the relevant facts support logical arguments clear or are incomplete. logical arguments about about how the Issue(s) how the Issue(s) will be will be resolved resolved. Conclude (25% ) The Conclusion is well The Conclusion is The Conclusion is The Conclusion is not The Conclusion describes supported by arguments supported by most of the supported by some of the stated or is not the outcome of the case in the Application section arguments, but the arguments but does not supported. and provides an overview and clearly explains how explanation of how those explain how they address of how the legal Rule those arguments address arguments address the the Issue(s). addresses the legal Issue the Issue(s). Issue(s) is not clear or is incomplete