• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month
Page
  1. 1
    1
  2. 2
    2
  3. 3
    3
  4. 4
    4
  5. 5
    5
  6. 6
    6
  7. 7
    7
  8. 8
    8
  9. 9
    9
  10. 10
    10
  11. 11
    11
  12. 12
    12
  13. 13
    13

Question 1: Explain the roles of legislative, executive, and judicial arms of the government in Australia

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

Question 1: Explain the roles of legislative, executive, and judicial arms of the government in Australia. Government of Australia is divided into three parts i.e. Parliament, Executive government, and Judicature. Thus traditionally the law making body is the Legislature, the one responsible for executive functions is the Executive, and the one responsible for determining the meaning of law is the Judiciary. The historical reason for separating the functions was to secure freedom for the individual by controlling abuse of public power exercised by authoritarian rulers. Practically, this separation of powers cannot apply in Australia because of the close relationship of the Executive and the Legislature. Parliament: In Australia, the nine Parliaments, as Legislatures, are the principle law-making authorities. Thus, law-making power of the Commonwealth is exercised by parliament. Parliament has two principle functions: the making of Legislation and the supervision of Executive. The parliament of Australia is not sovereign because of the division of legislative powers between the Commonwealth and States. The constitution divides total law making powers into specific powers, which is granted to Commonwealth parliament and general law making powers are retained by states, both the powers are limited by constitution by imposing prohibitions. The main function of Parliament is to make laws, which is called as an "Act" - which means Parliament has acted in its capacity as legislature. The two general terms used to refer to laws made by parliament are "statutes" and "legislation", the former refers more to Acts whilst latter covers Acts. These Acts are formulated, passed and then brought into operation by Parliament1. Executive: Just like nine parliaments Australia has nine Executives arms. This arm is referred to as 'the Government'. Governor-General as Queen's representative exercises this power. Executive council has two forms, Cabinet and Executive Council. 1 D.K. Srivastava, T. Deklin, P. Singh, Introduction to Australian law (1996) 21-27. The Cabinet comprises of group of ministers from the Parliament, their responsibility includes making political decisions and to decide matters of legislation to place before parliament. ...read more.

Middle

The case of Ebay Inc. V Bidder's Edge Inc. 100 F Supp 2D 1058 (2000) proves that the traditional contract law didn't cover the modern aspect like Trespassing through websites, where website is the means of business15. The cases where there is no contract between two parties, negligence takes cares of protection of person, property or economic interest from damage caused by another person's failure to take reasonable care16. As a result in the case of Donoghue V Stevenson (1932) AC 562 the court held manufacturer liable to the consumer because of the fact that there was negligence in manufacturing of product, even though there was no contract between them17. 12 P. Gillies, Business Law, (9th ed, 1999) 572. 13 L. Griggs, E. Clark, I. Iredale, Managers and the Law: A Guide for Business Decision Makers (2nd ed, 2003) 94. 14 Ibid 116. 15Ibid 118. 16 Ibid 118. 17 Ibid 118. Breach of duty states that once the duty of care has been shown to exist, the focus of attention shifts to the issue of whether the defendant breached his duty that is whether his/her conduct was negligent. A defendant, whose conduct falls below the acceptable standard of care, is by definition negligent18. Lets take the case of Rogers v Whitaker (1991) 23 NSWLR 600, where a medical practitioner was found to have been negligent in failing to advice the patient as to the risk of a proposed operation, designed to improve the sight of one eye. The other eye was good but she was not advised the potential complications involved in the operation. But she finally developed that condition and became blind and due to the fact that he had not told the patient court held the surgeon responsible by showing negligence on his part19. Thus tort law with Trade practices act has proved itself far better than the traditional contract act in coping up with the modern business trends. ...read more.

Conclusion

29 D. Khoury, Y. Yamouni, Understanding Contract Law (5th ed, 1998) 46. 30 B. Sweeney, J. O'Reilly, Law in Commerce (2001) 78. 31 R. Vermeesch, K. Lindgren, Business Law of Australia (8th ed, 2001) 139. In the second case, the two parties have completely agreed upon all the terms of their bargain and intend no departure from or addition to that which their agreed terms express or imply, but nevertheless have made performance of one or more of the terms conditional upon the execution of formal document32. In the third case in which the intention of the parties is not to make a concluded bargain at all, unless and until they execute a formal contract33. In the first two cases it's a binding contract whereas in the third case the terms of the agreement are not intended to have, and therefore do not have any legal binding effect of their own. Thus this question depends upon the intention disclosed by the language employed by the parties34. Thus in order to have a contract according to the rules stated above, the acceptance towards terms and conditions is shown from both the sides. Lets see the case of Masters v Cameron (1954) 91 CLR 353 35 the court decided that the parties were doing the formal requirements governing the sale of land which shows no intention to be immediately bound as and that their was not contract between them. Thus we conclude that the act done by Tom and Croyton would not be considered as an acceptance and that there is no contract between them. And to have a contract they have to go to the seller and offer him a price, if accepted they have to get legally bound through certain terms and conditions. 32 R. Vermeesch, K. Lindgren, Business Law of Australia (10th ed, 2001) 39. 33 Ibid 139. 34 Ibid 140. 35 Ibid 140. ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our University Degree Contract Law section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related University Degree Contract Law essays

  1. Compare torts liability with contractual liability and comment on the appropriateness of the former ...

    their premises safe from known dangers" for explicit and implicit business invitees and employees (Torts) In the Health and Safety At Work Act 1974 and Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999, employers have a tortuous responsibility towards protecting persons at work, independent contractors and visitors against risks of health

  2. This executive summary deals with the Marilyn M. case.

    any sales and share no part of the advertising costs of their retailers. Ashleigh's products are sold through 40 freelance agents in Canada and 180 in the United States. In North America Ashleigh's retail base is in excess of 12,000 outlets.

  1. The Main Requirements of a Simple Legal Binding Contract - Law of Contract.

    The engines were old and the staff incompetent, with the result that 20 weeks were lost. As a result the defendants decided to terminate the contract due to breach of condition to provide a seaworthy ship. However the plaintiffs bought an action against the defendants for terminating the contract as

  2. Contract Law - Problem Question

    However if the term is merely a warranty (minor term), then the contract cannot be terminated and an attempt to do so is a breach. The intention of the parties is a clear indicator whether a term was intended to be a condition or a warranty.

  1. Critically examine and discuss the inter-relationship between the law of Contract and the law ...

    when considering, in each case, whether the ingredients of a tort action and contract action are present. The mere fact that all the ingredients for a contract are present does not prevent there being a tort duty or presumably vice versa.11 A similar case to Central Trust Co v Rafuse

  2. agrrement offer and acceptance

    Oil Refinery, the contract provided that it 'shall be valid for 10 years' but specified the price only for the first two years, and did not set out any mechanism for determining the price for the remaining period. The court held that the contract was nevertheless valid for the full

  1. Whether the common law fiduciary duty or duty of fidelity and good faith gives ...

    Conduct which in respect of important matters is incompatible with the fulfillment of an employee's duty, or involves an opposition, or conflict between his interest and his duty to his employer, or impedes the faithful performance of his obligations, or is destructive of the necessary confidence between employer and employee,

  2. All contracts are agreements but all agreements are not contracts. Discuss.

    Therefore, if a contract is influenced by any of these elements there cannot be free consent. Salmond has described this as an error in consensus. An agreement, which is made by coercion, fraud, under influence and misrepresentation, is voidable at the option of that party whose consent was not free (Section 19).

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work