LAW2STA Statutory Interpretation Assignment Part A-La Trobe University

Question Paper for LAW2STA Statutory Interpretation Assignment Part A

Question 1 (20 marks)

Henrietta is an Investigator under the Space (Launches and Returns) Act 2018 (Cth) (‘the 2018 Act’).
She enters an accident site on David’s property on 5 September 2024 for the purposes of the 2018 Act. The entry was with the consent of the occupier and complied with s 101 of the Act. On that day she hands the occupier (David) a written determination specifying that the last day of the access period is 19 September 2024.

On 19 September 2024, Henrietta gives David a second written determination, stating that the last day of the access period is now 3 October 2024. She explains to David that, despite their best efforts, their work at the accident site is not completed.

David then contacts you on 3 October 2024, saying that he is tired of the interruption to his daily life and he objects to what he says is ‘the extension’ of the period for investigating the accident. Now answer the following questions:

(a) Does the Investigator have the power to make a second written determination specifying a later day for the last day of the access period? In the course of answering the question, interpret s 99(2) of the 2018 Act.

(b) Assume now the Investigator does have the power to make a second determination specifying a later day for the last day of the access period. Was the power correctly exercised, that is, was the determination correctly made? Give reasons.

Question 2 (20 marks)

It is Monday 6 March 2023 when Joe Blow comes to your office for legal advice.

Joe says that last year, on 5 January 2022, he discovered an accident had happened with a high power rocket. Part of the rocket landed on his barn and demolished it. Assume damage has occurred to the barn. (However, as stated below, Joes says he did not become aware of the damage until 6 March 2022.)

Joe says that he was away from his property in January and February 2022 and it was not possible to have any communications about his property during that period. He says that he returned at the end of February 2022 to the property.

He says that, due to his laziness and an over-liking of computer games, on his return to the property on 27 February 2022 he did not venture out and inspect the property until 6 March

He remembers that on 28 February 2022 he started the engine of the 4-wheel drive to inspect the property but did not carry out an inspection because he decided he would rather play with his video games. He acknowledges that, if he had driven out on that day, he would have discovered the damage. On venturing out and inspecting his property on the morning of 6 March 2022, he then discovered the damage to the barn.

Now back to the events of the present day. On 6 March 2023 Joe asks your firm if he can sue for compensation for the damage to his barn. Your manager (Merilyn) requests you to answer this question today (6 March 2023): assuming an appropriate defendant can be found to be liable, is Joe within the time limit prescribed by s 75G of the Space (Launches and Returns) Act 2018 (Cth) (‘the 2018 Act’) for bringing an action for compensation for damage to which Part 4A of that Act applies? In other words, says Merilyn, determine the date for reckoning the time period referred to and, in that light, work out whether Joe is in time to bring such an action.

In the course of answering this question, you are to interpret s 75G(b) of the 2018 Act, and discuss its application to the facts.
In interpreting that provision in the light of the request, you should, among other things, formulate opposing constructions of the provision. One construction should support your client’s desire to bring an action. The opposing construction does not support your client’s interests.

Instructions and assessment details

Please see Subject Learning Guide on LMS (v 3) for allocated marks, due date, word limit, intended learning outcomes, special consideration, and university policies that apply to graded assessment.

Excellent Assignment Help

We Aim At:

Lowest Price.
100% Uniqueness.
Assignment Fastest Delivery.

Order Now View Sample Call Now : +61 363 877 039

Parts

This is Part A of the Assignment. Part B will be released separately. Although issued in two parts, the Assignment has one due date and the Parts are submitted together in the one document.

Format

In answering a question that raises general principles (Weeks 1-8) but not special issues (Weeks 9-11), students should as far as possible follow the problem solving template provided with the question paper. In answering a ‘special issues’ question, students should as far as possible follow any appropriate model issued for handling that issue, or, if no such model has been issued, use the problem solving template (adapted as necessary).

Preparatory steps

Before attempting the problem, it is recommended that students attempt one or more of the End-of-Semester Assignment exemplar questions on the LMS and self-assess using the answers provided.

Use of facts and information

If you think a material fact (‘fact X’) pertaining to the problem is not set out on the Question Paper, you may consider fact X as if it exists or can be proved to exist, provided it is plausible and that you also consider the alternative situation where fact X does not exist or cannot be proved to exist. This is standard advice with regard to legal problem solving and is not to be taken as a suggestion that a material fact is not stated in the problem.

Similar advice applies to any information, set out in the problem on the Question Paper, which you regard as ambiguous. If the ambiguity is plausible, then make the most probable inference, or give alternative advice based on each scenario. This is standard advice with regard to legal problem solving and is not to be taken as a suggestion that information in the problem is ambiguous.

Meaning of ‘interpret’

This includes developing competing constructions (meanings) of the unit(s) of inquiry that, when applied to the facts, promote the interests of the parties involved. For further guidance, see Meaning of ‘Unit(s) of Inquiry’ and Assessment Criteria below.

Meaning of ‘unit(s) of inquiry’

A unit of inquiry refers to the words of legislation whose meaning is in doubt. It is normally a legislative provision or an element (of such a provision) whose meaning is in doubt.

Students should not assume that a problem raises necessarily only one unit of inquiry. Speaking generally, legal problems may raise more than one unit of inquiry (see, eg Onebev Pty Ltd v Encore Beverages Pty Ltd [2016] VSC 284; Project Blue Sky Inc v Australian Broadcasting Authority (1998) 194 CLR 355), even within the same section (Onebev).
Multiple units of inquiry may arise for a number of reasons. They include: a potential aid to interpretation of the central unit of inquiry (such as another provision of the Act) may itself be ambiguous; a relevant law is expressed with multiple requirements; an apparent conflict may exist between multiple provisions of the same Act which both require interpretation;
more than one law may be potentially relevant; and the problem presents an alternative way to argue a case and answer the question.

Addressing a relevant law

A law often has more than one element. In addressing a relevant law a court may find that an element is not satisfied, but nevertheless, out of an abundance of caution and for other reasons, it will go on to consider the other elements of the law. In giving a legal opinion,students should do the same. If you find an element of a law is not satisfied, you should go
on to consider the other elements of the law.