Please either provide questions and answers according to 5, 10 and 15 marks questions or provide a detailed summary consisting of every possible answer for the ease of understanding.

PART A. CASE STUDY A

The plaintiff, Long Island Pty Ltd (Long Island) was an entertainment company and promoter that brought international artists to Australia for concerts. They entered a contract with Max Welter Operating Pty Ltd (Welter) to hire a venue in Sydney, owned by Welter. The contract was entered into and signed by both parties on 17 January 2017 and included terms about ticketing, staffing, event safety and closure (the Contract). The venue hire was for a performance by a Jamaican reggae and dancehall artist known as Beenie Man, who was doing a tour around Australia arranged by Long Island. The Sydney performance was to take place on 23 March 2017. On 21 March Welter sent Long Island an email noting their concerns about poor ticket sales, the late appearance of the performer on stage, and safety issues for staff and patrons. They advised that Long Island had not satisfied the Contract. Welter then cancelled the venue hire for the Sydney performance. Welter later said that Long Island had also breached the law, as it had been involved in fraudulent ticket sales. Long Island found another venue for the Sydney performance. They later sued Welter in the Sydney Civil and Administrative Tribunal for damages for breach of contract, due to the cancellation of the venue hire. Long Island is a corporation registered in Indonesia. Clause 24 of the Contract between Long Island and Welter read as follows: Event Closure - MWO [Max Welter] may without any liability or penalty, at its sole discretion and without prior notice, close or suspend the event once started, for safety or security reasons or any other breach of applicable law or code which has occurred or is about the occur at the time of closure. On a different note and during the trial, Welter brought as witnesses ten individuals claiming that they have been offered tickets for the Sydney concert by a third party, an individual called John, at half of the official purchase price of the tickets. Welter alleged that John was linked to Long Island and it was Long Island who attempted from the beginning to jeopardize the event and undermine the interests of Welter thereto. In their support, Long Island stated that they have never been involved in any fraudulent ticket sales and, after the cancellation of the Contract by Welter, it costed them additional 100,000 Australian Dollars to be able to rent another venue for the Sydney concert. In order to reject such claims, Welter relied on a disclaimer in the contract stating that Welter assumes no liability for any loss suffered by Long Island, for any reason whatsoever. At the end of the Court trial and prior to the Court issuing the verdict, the venue owned by Welter was severely flooded by rain, therefore was unusable for a very long time. We may assume it was destroyed. [Adapted based on Kingsbridge Holdings Pty Ltd v Max Watt's Operating Ptd Ltd (Civil Claims) [2018] VCAT 1674]

PART B. CASE STUDY B

Mark and Spencer were brothers. Spencer was 75 years old and they were both living in Victoria, Australia. They were both passionate about outdoor activities, they owned a small boat and they were sometimes going out sailing on the Groove, a lake close to their home. From the times he was a Professor of Geography at Pensington University, Spencer recalls that the lakes in Australia were resources rich and had a very enjoyable climate, especially for old people like him. On a Saturday morning, they were both in Mark's car driving to the lake for a sail. While in the car, they heard on the radio that there was a fishing contest happening on the lake that day. No formal enrolment requirements were needed. The radio advertisement said that in the lake, there was a big fish called the Blackbone and whoever caught the Blackbone would be entitled to a prize of 5,000 Australian Dollars. The brothers thought about it and decided to give it a try. Spencer said: "Oh, I would like to win 5,000 Australian Dollars. It would be very helpful to me. My instalments for my bank mortgage for my property, the Wellington, have not been paid in a long time. I am afraid the bank will take the house away from me." Page 4 of 4 Mark then offered to help his brother. In return, Spencer offered to give the title to the property to Mark and offered Mark to come and live at the Wellington right away. In the meantime, the brothers reached the lake and, while on the boat fishing, they caught the Blackbone fish. They went to claim the prize, however the organizers told them they cannot claim the prize because they did not catch the fish by participating in the contest, but as a result of a social gathering. On the way home, Mark was very happy that he will be able to live at the Wellington, a property he loved all his life. He decided to shorten the way and crossed randomly an unpaved road. While there, their car was hit by John's horse and carriage. John was returning from his agricultural works and that was his usual way home. Mark and Spencer tried to make John liable for the accident, however John told them his carriage does not poses a license nor an insurance and the road was designated for carriages, not for motorized vehicles. After a while, Mark moved to the Wellington property, continued making payments for the mortgage and improved the property. When he asked his brother Spencer to transfer the title to the property to him, Spencer refused.