This BULAW5914 commercial law that requires forward planning and adequate time for research, reading and reflecting. It comprises 35% of your assessment in this subject.
You should begin researching early to gather information and establish a plan as soon as possible.
The total length of the assignment must not be more than 2,500 words; do not include the references or bibliography in the word count. Submission of the assignment is due in teaching week 9 on Friday by 9pm. The specific procedures for submission will be advised by your lecturer and typically this will be via Moodle. Please note that late penalties apply to assignments where no alternative arrangements have been made with lecturing staff (subject to the discretion of the course coordinator).
Note this background: The Thermomix is the brand name for a type of high-end electrically powered kitchen appliance. The appliances are made in France by a German company Vorwerk & Co. KG, and exclusively imported to Australia by the company Thermomix in Australia Pty Ltd (‘TIA’). TIA sells the appliance in Australia only through natural persons (referred to as ‘consultants’) who have a contractual right from TIA to sell the appliance to retail and trade customers.
Read: Paul Latimer, Australian Business Law (a 2013-2016 edition) ¶4-010 to ¶4-220; and ¶7-215.
Read: The Australian Consumers Association Ltd (‘CHOICE’) Mass Incident Report to the ACCC: Consumer reports of Thermomix product failure and serious injuries https://www.choice.com.au/~/media/52d973c58c214df985bada83f482f852.ashx?la=en published in May 2016 and also available for download from the Moodle page for this course.
Consider only the position of the Thermomix appliance Australian users whose burn injuries were summarised in Appendix One (pages 21-23) to the choice Mass Incident Report.
For the injured users explain the basis of possible liability in the tort of negligence that any manufacturer or distributor of the Thermomix appliance might have to those users. Leave aside the question of the amount of damages, but in your answer refer to common law legal principles and (where relevant) to any relevant civil liability statute provisions that apply in your State.
Why do caps (i.e. limits) on personal injuries damages exist in Australia? By referring to the relevant civil liability statute provisions that apply in your State, explain what role those caps play in limiting the extent of possible tort liability (considered in question 1) that might be owed to the injured users.
Do the injured users have possible rights under Part 3-5 of Australian Consumer Law (ACL) against any manufacturer or distributor of the Thermomix appliance? If so on what grounds could they bring such an ACL action and what defences might a sued manufacturer or distributor have? Leave aside any question of the amount of damages under the ACL.