IRAC
You need to answer each question under the IRAC headings; however, you do not need to repeat the same rules if they have been referred to under RULES in previous answers.
As this is not a research assignment it is sufficient that you only refer to the information in the lecture notes which can be referenced as: “FBL – Lecture Notes 2013”.
Wherever possible in your answer cases should be referred to in support of the principles of law that are applied to the facts.
Instructions for referencing cases:
When using a well-known legal principle it is necessary to refer to the relevant case that the principle came from. This is done by providing the case name immediately after the principle (as shown below) or as a footnote. For example:
Equitable estoppel prevents a promisor from going back on a promise where the promisee has relied upon it to their detriment: Waltons Stores v Maher (1988) 164 CLR 387.
Note: You do not have to provide details about the case referred to; however, you will need to provide the complete citation for that case. This is the reference for that particular case and it must either appear in text (as shown above), as a footnote or in a reference list at the conclusion of the paper (as shown below). In the above example the citation was given immediately after the case name. If you choose to do this then there is no need to provide a reference list of cases at the end of your paper.
READ THE FOLLOWING FACTUAL ACCOUNT AND ANSWER ALL THE QUESTIONS AT THE END:
Harry, an accountant, is also an art collector and regularly attends art exhibitions. In November Harry attended an exhibition at Red Pepper Gallery where he was impressed by a painting for sale entitled “Red Rocks at Sunset”. When he inquired about the painting he was informed by the Gallery curator, Simon, that it was an original painting by the famous indigenous artist Bobbi Brown and that it was valued at $10,000. Usually all the paintings in the Gallery are first examined by an art expert before being offered for sale as recommended in the “Gallery Owner’s Risk Management Guide”. Because time was running out before the exhibition “Red Rocks at Sunset” had not been examined, however, Simon was sure that it was an original Brown because he had sold other Brown paintings before and no one had questioned their authenticity. Harry is passionate about Australian art and immediately offered to buy the painting. Simon accepted and Harry paid the deposit of $500 with the remaining amount to be paid upon collection two weeks later, at the end of the exhibition.
Over the next week Simon did get “Red Rocks at Sunset” examined and discovered that the painting was not an original Bobbi Brown, but a clever forgery, however, when Harry came to collect it Simon did not mention this to Harry. Harry proudly displayed the painting in his office enjoying the compliments that he received from his clients. In fact one of Harry’s clients, Joe, was so impressed with the painting that he made Harry such a good offer to buy it that Harry could not refuse. Harry said: “it’s an original Bobbi Brown so I will be sad to see it go, but I know that you will take good care of it.” Soon after buying the painting Joe entered it for sale at an art auction in Sydney where it was examined to verify its authenticity. The art experts all agreed that it was not an original Bobbi Brown and that Joe had been cheated. Joe had paid Harry $20,000 for it and was determined to get his money back.
Harry refuses to pay Joe back because it is not his fault that the painting was forged since Red Pepper Gallery had sold it to him as an original Bobbi Brown.
ANSWER ALL OF THE FOLLOWING QUESTIONS
(1) Advise Joe whether he is entitled to get his money back from Harry?
[6 marks]
(2) Advise Harry whether he has any cause of action against Red Pepper Gallery?
[7 marks]
(3) If Red Pepper Gallery did not know that the painting was a forgery advise Harry whether he would still have any cause of action against them?
ORDER THIS ESSAY HERE NOW AND GET A DISCOUNT !!!
Place an order todayand get 13% Discount (Code GAC13)
As this is not a research assignment it is sufficient that you only refer to the information in the lecture notes which can be referenced as: “FBL – Lecture Notes 2013”.
Wherever possible in your answer cases should be referred to in support of the principles of law that are applied to the facts.
Instructions for referencing cases:
When using a well-known legal principle it is necessary to refer to the relevant case that the principle came from. This is done by providing the case name immediately after the principle (as shown below) or as a footnote. For example:
Equitable estoppel prevents a promisor from going back on a promise where the promisee has relied upon it to their detriment: Waltons Stores v Maher (1988) 164 CLR 387.
Note: You do not have to provide details about the case referred to; however, you will need to provide the complete citation for that case. This is the reference for that particular case and it must either appear in text (as shown above), as a footnote or in a reference list at the conclusion of the paper (as shown below). In the above example the citation was given immediately after the case name. If you choose to do this then there is no need to provide a reference list of cases at the end of your paper.
READ THE FOLLOWING FACTUAL ACCOUNT AND ANSWER ALL THE QUESTIONS AT THE END:
Harry, an accountant, is also an art collector and regularly attends art exhibitions. In November Harry attended an exhibition at Red Pepper Gallery where he was impressed by a painting for sale entitled “Red Rocks at Sunset”. When he inquired about the painting he was informed by the Gallery curator, Simon, that it was an original painting by the famous indigenous artist Bobbi Brown and that it was valued at $10,000. Usually all the paintings in the Gallery are first examined by an art expert before being offered for sale as recommended in the “Gallery Owner’s Risk Management Guide”. Because time was running out before the exhibition “Red Rocks at Sunset” had not been examined, however, Simon was sure that it was an original Brown because he had sold other Brown paintings before and no one had questioned their authenticity. Harry is passionate about Australian art and immediately offered to buy the painting. Simon accepted and Harry paid the deposit of $500 with the remaining amount to be paid upon collection two weeks later, at the end of the exhibition.
Over the next week Simon did get “Red Rocks at Sunset” examined and discovered that the painting was not an original Bobbi Brown, but a clever forgery, however, when Harry came to collect it Simon did not mention this to Harry. Harry proudly displayed the painting in his office enjoying the compliments that he received from his clients. In fact one of Harry’s clients, Joe, was so impressed with the painting that he made Harry such a good offer to buy it that Harry could not refuse. Harry said: “it’s an original Bobbi Brown so I will be sad to see it go, but I know that you will take good care of it.” Soon after buying the painting Joe entered it for sale at an art auction in Sydney where it was examined to verify its authenticity. The art experts all agreed that it was not an original Bobbi Brown and that Joe had been cheated. Joe had paid Harry $20,000 for it and was determined to get his money back.
Harry refuses to pay Joe back because it is not his fault that the painting was forged since Red Pepper Gallery had sold it to him as an original Bobbi Brown.
ANSWER ALL OF THE FOLLOWING QUESTIONS
(1) Advise Joe whether he is entitled to get his money back from Harry?
[6 marks]
(2) Advise Harry whether he has any cause of action against Red Pepper Gallery?
[7 marks]
(3) If Red Pepper Gallery did not know that the painting was a forgery advise Harry whether he would still have any cause of action against them?
ORDER THIS ESSAY HERE NOW AND GET A DISCOUNT !!!
Place an order todayand get 13% Discount (Code GAC13)
