Andrew Robertson & Jeannie Paterson, Contract: Cases and Materials, 14th ed, LBC, 2020 (“Casebook” / CB)
Andrew Robertson & Jeannie Paterson, Principles of Contract Law, 6th ed, LBC, 2020 (“Principles Book” / PB)
Legislation Pack (extracted legislation on Moodle) (“LP”)
For additional clarity or detail:
J W Carter, Cases and Materials on Contract Law in Australia, 8th ed, 2024
J W Carter, Contract Law in Australia, 8th ed, 2023
N C Seddon & R A Bigwood, Cheshire and Fifoot’s Law of Contract, 12th Aus ed, 2022
K Yin et al., Contract Law: Cases and Materials, CUP, 2020
A Stewart, W Swain & K Fairweather, Contract Law: Principles and Context, CUP, 2019
Jeannie Paterson, Corones’ Australian Consumer Law, 5th ed, 2022
Online Resources: Monash Law Library guides – eTexts, legal commentary, and library guides.
Overview
Read alongside the Contract B Moodle page.
Monitor Moodle for updates.
Contains course outline, topics, primary sources, and examinable content.
Examinable Content
All listed topics, cases, and legislation are examinable unless marked “not examinable.”
Legislative provisions not in the Legislation Pack require general understanding only.
Cases referenced in Principles Book but not listed here are not examinable.
Required Reading
Items marked with a star (*) are required reading.
Read legislative provisions in the Legislation Pack (LP).
Unstarred cases are optional but may be useful for clarification or assignments.
Complete required reading and online lectures before workshops or tutorials.
Availability of Cases and Legislation
Most cases extracted in Case Book (CB), with paragraph/page references.
Remaining cases available online or in the library.
Starred cases not in CB must be obtained and read.
All legislative provisions are in the Legislation Pack (LP) on Moodle.
Topic 1 – Termination by Agreement, Performance and Breach
Principles Book, Ch. 18–19, pp. 445–446 *
Shevill v Builders Licensing Board (1982) 149 CLR 620 786
Topic 2 – Termination for Breach
Principles Book, Ch. 21 *
Key Cases:
Arcos v Ronaasen [1933] AC 470
L Schuler AG v Wickman Machine Tool Sales Ltd [1974] AC 235
Luna Park (NSW) Ltd v Tramways Advertising Pty Ltd (1938) 61 CLR 286
Associated Newspapers Ltd v Bancks (1951) 83 CLR 322 *576
Hongkong Fir Shipping Co Ltd v Kawasaki Kisen Kaisha Ltd [1962] 2 QB 26 *578
Koompahtoo Local Aboriginal Land Council v Sanpine (2007) 233 CLR 115 *586
Topic 3 – Termination for Repudiation
Principles Book, Ch. 22 *
Key Cases:
Carr v J A Berriman Pty Ltd (1953) 89 CLR 327 *593
Progressive Mailing House Pty Ltd v Tabali Pty Ltd (1985) 157 CLR 17 *596
Maple Flock Co Ltd v Universal Furniture Products [1934] 1 KB 148 *603
Topic 4 – Termination for Delay
Principles Book, Ch. 23 *
Key Legislation:
Goods Act 1958 (Vic) s 15 *LP
Property Law Act 1958 (Vic) s 41 *LP
Key Cases: Louinder v Leis (1982) 149 CLR 509 *611
Topic 5 – Consequences of Affirmation or Termination
Principles Book, Ch. 24 *
Key Cases: Bowes v Chaleyer (1923) 32 CLR 159 *628; McDonald v Dennys Lascelles Ltd (1933) 48 CLR 457 *824
Topic 6 – Restrictions on the Right to Terminate
Principles Book, Ch. 25 *
Key Concepts: Election, Readiness & Willingness, Estoppel, Waiver, Relief Against Forfeiture, Good Faith, Contractual Restrictions
Key Legislation & Cases:
Goods Act 1958 (Vic) s 35 *LP
Foran v Wight (1989) 168 CLR 385 633
Waltons Stores v Maher (1988) 164 CLR 387
Topic 7 – Damages
Principles Book, Ch. 26–27 (partial) *
Key Cases:
Robinson v Harman (1848) 1 Ex 850
Bellgrove v Eldridge (1954) 90 CLR 613 *715
Baltic Shipping Co v Dillon (1993) 176 CLR 344
Topic 8 – Liquidated Damages and Penalties
Principles Book, Ch. 28 *
Key Cases: Dunlop Pneumatic Tyre Co Ltd v New Garage & Motor Co Ltd [1915] AC 79 *803; Paciocco v ANZ (2016) 258 CLR 525 *803
Topic 9 – Specific Performance and Injunctions
Principles Book, Ch. 30 (excluding [30.85]–[30.90]) *
Key Cases: Dougan v Ley (1946) 71 CLR 142 *835; Curro v Beyond Productions Pty Ltd (1993) 30 NSWLR 337 *839
Topic 10 – Actions for Debt
Principles Book, Ch. 29 *
Key Cases: Cutter v Powell (1795) 6 Term Rep 320; Steele v Tardiani (1946) 72 CLR 386 814; Hoenig v Isaacs [1952] 2 All ER 176 *819
Topic 11 – Restitution
Principles Book, Ch. 10 extracts *
Key Cases: Baltic Shipping Co v Dillon (1993) 176 CLR 344 *[27.180]; Fibrosa Spolka Akcyjna v Fairbairn Lawson Combe Barbour Ltd [1943] AC 32 294
The Contract B assessment focuses on the application of key contract law principles to problem scenarios or case studies. The main requirements include:
Demonstrate understanding of key concepts: Termination (by agreement, breach, repudiation, delay), remedies (damages, specific performance, injunctions, liquidated damages), restitution, actions for debt, and vitiating factors.
Application of legal principles to facts: Analyze the facts, identify relevant legal issues, and apply appropriate case law and statutory provisions.
Use of required texts and legislation: Reference the Principles Book, Casebook, and Legislation Pack (LP) as primary sources, and apply relevant cases and legislative provisions.
Critical analysis: Evaluate rights, obligations, and remedies of parties under different circumstances.
Structured argument: Present answers clearly, with legal reasoning supported by authorities.
Key pointers to be covered:
Identification of contractual terms and breaches.
Analysis of termination rights and restrictions.
Application of remedies for breach or non-performance.
Evaluation of statutory and common law vitiating factors.
Consideration of equitable principles such as restitution and relief against forfeiture.
The academic mentor guided the student using a structured, stepwise methodology:
Task: Read the scenario carefully to identify the legal issues.
Mentor’s Guidance: Highlighted key facts (e.g., breach of contract, delay in performance, actions by parties).
Learning Objective: Critical reading and issue-spotting.
Task: Map each issue to a principle from the Principles Book and Casebook.
Mentor’s Guidance:
Termination issues → Ch. 18–23.
Remedies → Ch. 26–30.
Actions for debt and restitution → Ch. 10, 29.
Learning Objective: Linking theory to practice.
Task: Apply relevant authorities to the facts.
Mentor’s Guidance:
Use starred cases for core principles (e.g., Bowes v Chaleyer, Bellgrove v Eldridge, Baltic Shipping Co v Dillon).
Apply legislative provisions (e.g., Goods Act 1958 (Vic) ss 15, 35; Supreme Court Act 1986 (Vic) ss 38, 54).
Learning Objective: Legal reasoning and authority-based argumentation.
Task: Organize answers by issues.
Mentor’s Guidance:
Issue → Rule → Application → Conclusion (IRAC method).
Ensure clarity and flow, separate each topic or principle clearly.
Learning Objective: Structured legal writing.
Task: Provide analysis of remedies, equitable relief, and potential outcomes.
Mentor’s Guidance: Evaluate whether termination was valid, whether damages are recoverable, and any statutory implications.
Learning Objective: Critical thinking and practical application of remedies.
Assessment Outcome: Student produced a clear, structured solution that:
Identified all relevant issues.
Applied both statutory and case law principles accurately.
Evaluated remedies, termination rights, and equitable principles.
Demonstrated understanding of the interplay between common law and statutory provisions.
Learning Objectives Covered:
Issue-spotting and fact analysis.
Application of contract law principles and statutory provisions.
Use of authoritative cases and legal reasoning.
Critical evaluation of remedies and termination rights.
Structured legal writing and presentation of arguments.
Summary: The assessment required an integrated understanding of contract law concepts. By following the mentor-guided, stepwise approach, the student successfully applied theory to practical scenarios, producing a solution aligned with learning objectives and assessment expectations.
Looking for a reference to guide your assignment? You can download our sample solution to see how a well-structured answer looks, understand the format, and get insights into applying key concepts.
Remember: This sample is for reference only. Submitting it as your own work is considered plagiarism and may impact your academic standing.
Want a completely plagiarism-free, custom-written solution tailored to your requirements? Our team of professional academic writers can craft a fresh assignment that:
Is 100% original and tailored to your brief.
Demonstrates clear analysis, structure, and proper referencing.
Saves you time and ensures you meet deadlines without stress.
Helps you understand complex topics through expertly written content.
Protect your grades and submit with confidence. Choose the option that suits you best
© Copyright 2025 My Uni Papers – Student Hustle Made Hassle Free. All rights reserved.