Demonstrate understanding of issues in international business law and evaluate the scope and the ways in which business is regulated in a global economy, understand, and analyse contract and tort law.
Module code and title:
GMDGBS206 International Business Law
Module leader:
Assignment No. and type:
Written assignment (scenarios) 3000 words
Assessment weighting:
100%
Submission time and date:
Target feedback time and date:
Three weeks from the date of final submission
Assignment task
The Summative Assessment will be composed by three scenarios that will allow you to demonstrate your knowledge of analysis of corporate internationalisation and the challenges of operating across borders.
This assignment has been designed to provide you with an opportunity to demonstrate your achievement of the following module learning outcomes:
LO 1
Demonstrate understanding of issues in international business law and evaluate the scope and the ways in which business is regulated in a global economy, understand, and analyse contract and tort law.
LO 2
Critically consider the law that governs international contractual relations conducted and concluded electronically across borders and over distances.
LO 3
Consider and analyse the ways in which international business law seeks to align and enforce national intellectual property protection mechanisms.
LO 4
Critically analyse the regulation of international corporate behaviour and corporate culture in a globalised economy.
Task requirements
OVERVIEW
Report (3000 words):
Part 1: The below scenarios will align with Learning Outcomes 1 & 2 (you are expected to write a maximum of 1500 words):
1.a. Ellie, who lives in Paris, emailed Memoona -an acquaintance who owns an art gallery in London- a picture of an old painting which was left to her by her grandmother, who also lived in London. Ellie is interested in selling the painting as soon as possible. Memoona thinks that it might be by Rembrandt but is not sure. Memoona offers £5,000 for the painting. Ellie, who will travel to London that week, sends a text message accepting Memoona’s offer, to be paid in exchange for the painting next week. The evening before the transaction occur, Ellie shows the painting to Herve, who is an art critic. He recognises the painting and assures this is a Rembrandt. It may be worth up to £500,000. The following day Ellie refuses to hand it over to Memoona for the agreed price.
State and discuss the specific legal issues in scenario that arise between Memoona and Ellie in the above transaction (1.a.).
1.b. Memoona decided to put on an art exhibition at the gallery, to be held on the 2nd of January 2022. She contracted with Eric Suppliers Ltd to install a new heating system, and to paint the entrance hall in the gallery, at a total cost of £10,000. Both works had to be completed by 27th December 2021. Eric completed the installation work by 26th December 2021 but could not complete the painting until the 1st January, 2022.
As a result of Eric using the wrong type of paint, horrific toxic smells emanated through the main hall of the gallery. Memoona became furious, anxious, and extremely disappointed when she realised that it would be very difficult to hold the exhibition at her gallery. She phoned another gallery to find out if the exhibition could be held there instead. She received no reply. She could have held the exhibition in the gallery basement but due to space restrictions there that would have meant she could have only accommodated some 50 guests (as opposed to the original 200 invited guests). Instead, she decided to cancel the whole exhibition.
Based on the scenario;
i. Memoona has refused to pay Eric because of the defective painting. Advise Eric of what to do using relevant legal principles.
Memoona has now decided to sue Eric for the loss of income in the sum of £500,000 as a result of the cancellation of her exhibition. Advise Memoona of the specific legal issues in this matter and what may be the likely outcome.
Part 2: The below scenarios will align with Learning Outcome 3 (you are expected to write a maximum of 750 words):
Hiades Ltd, a UK based company, has developed a very innovative technological solution that unifies all the operative and administrative systems with an easy-to-use interface adapted to all pilotage requirements. The software is being used by several European Port Authorities. In Europe, software is usually copyrighted, but Hiades would like to expand to the USA. However, in the meantime, Hiades found that their software is being used by some companies without any license.
a) Critically analyse the different types of protection for the software and advise Hiades how to obtain the best possible protection for their software worldwide.
b) Advise Hiades about their options using relevant legal Intellectual Property principles.
Part 3: The below scenarios will align with Learning Outcome 4 (you are expected to write a maximum of 750 words):
Death Star Group, Ltd is a multinational company operating in the aerospace industry. While the company considers the carbon intensity of their business to be low, they have been publishing greenhouse gas emissions data for a number of years to meet regulatory requirements. At the last AGM, shareholders filed a resolution requesting that Death Star Group, Ltd disclose more information on the risks of climate change to their business and the financial impacts associated with these risks in the next annual report.
As other companies in the aerospace sector have not disclosed this information, the company is concerned that publishing these figures will draw negative attention to the business, as they may be perceived to be more vulnerable in the market. The reporting team have also expressed concerns over the quality of the information you currently have available, as the company have not undertaken a specific climate risk assessment.
a. State and discuss the specific legal issues that arise in the above scenario. Advice Death Star Group, Ltd about the convenience of disclosing the risk and financial impact information investors are requesting alongside its legal and reputational implications.
You must demonstrate evidence of wider research, real world application and reading of core textbooks, learning materials on Moodle and academic scholarly work through Harvard referencing.
The word count excludes the cover page, table of contents, financials, references, and appendices.
You must reference all information used in the report, using the Harvard Referencing Guide.
See attached grid for grade descriptors.
Referencing and research requirements
Please reference your work according to the Harvard style; you can access guidance on this here: https://libguides.uos.ac.uk/academic/referencing/Harvard
How your work will be assessed
Your work will be assessed on the extent to which it demonstrates your achievement of the stated learning outcomes for this assignment (see above) and against other key criteria, as defined in the University’s institutional grading descriptors. If it is appropriate to the format of your assignment and your subject area, a proportion of your marks will also depend upon your use of academic referencing conventions.
This assignment will be marked according to the grading descriptors for Level 5
Submission details
This assignment should be submitted electronically via Moodle (module tutors will discuss this process with you during class time).
Please ensure that your work has been saved in an appropriate file format (Microsoft Word, Excel or PowerPoint, or PDF are the most widely used; Google Docs is also accepted). Your file must also contain at least 20 words of text, consist of fewer than 400 pages and be less than 40MB in size.
You can submit your work as many times as you like before the submission date. If you do submit your work more than once, your earlier submission will be replaced by the most recent version.
Once you have submitted your work, you will receive a digital receipt as proof of submission, which will be sent to your forwarded e-mail address (provided you have set this up). Please keep this receipt for future reference, along with the original electronic copy of your assignment
You are reminded of the University’s regulations on academic misconduct, which can be viewed on the University website: https://www.uos.ac.uk/sites/default/files/Academic-Misconduct-Policy.pdf. In submitting your assignment, you are acknowledging that you have read and understood these regulations
Submission date and time
This assignment should be submitted before 11:59 PM UK time on 10th June 2024
You should submit all work for summative assessments by the above deadline. Work submitted up to three working days after the deadline will be accepted and marked, but the mark will be capped at the pass mark (40%) unless there is a valid reason for the late submission (i.e., having been granted an extension to the deadline or a deferral under the terms of the Extenuating Circumstances Policy).
Work submitted more than three working days after the deadline without a valid reason will not be accepted and will be recorded as 0% RN (refer, no work submitted).
For more information, please refer to: http://studenthandbook.uos.ac.uk/index.php/student-guides/assessment-the-basics-undergraduate
Feedback and marks for this assignment will be available in three weeks from the deadline.
General Grading Criteria
Level 5
In accordance with the FHEQ, at the end of Level 5 students will be expected to have a sound knowledge of the basic underlying concepts and principles of a subject, and an ability to evaluate and interpret these within the context of that area of study. State and discuss the specific legal issues in scenario that arise between Memoona and Ellie in the above transaction (1.a.). They should be able to present, evaluate and interpret qualitative and quantitative data in order to develop lines of argument and make sound judgements in accordance with basic theories and concepts of their subject(s) of study. They will have learned how to take different approaches to solving problems, and will be able to communicate the results of their study/work accurately and reliably, and with structured and coherent arguments.
Assessment category
Pass mark, demonstrating achievement of all associated learning outcomes
Marginal fail
Fail
1st: 70% – 100%
2:1: 60% – 69%
2:2: 50% – 59%
3rd: 40% – 49%
35% – 39%
20% – 34%
< 20%
Knowledge and understanding of the basic underlying concepts and principles of the subject(s)
High quality work showing detailed understanding of the basic underlying concepts and principles of the subject(s). Demonstrate understanding of issues in international business law and evaluate the scope and the ways in which business is regulated in a global economy, understand, and analyse contract and tort law.
Work of solid quality showing competent and consistent understanding of the basic underlying concepts and principles of the subject(s)
Adequate work showing understanding of the basic underlying concepts and principles of the subject(s), but lacking depth and breadth.
Simple factual approach showing limited understanding of the basic underlying concepts and principles of the subject(s). Narrow or misguided selection of material, with elements missing or inaccurate.
Weak work showing limited, fragmentary understanding of the basic underlying concepts and principles of the subject(s). Work characterised by inaccuracies, irrelevant material and/or absence of appropriate information.
Unsatisfactory work showing weak and flawed understanding of the basic underlying concepts and principles of the subject(s), for example through serious inaccuracies, inclusion of a significant amount of irrelevant material and/or absence of appropriate information.
Highly unsatisfactory work showing major gaps in understanding of the basic underlying concepts and principles of the subject(s). Inclusion of largely irrelevant material, absence of appropriate information and significant inaccuracies.
Cognitive and intellectual skills
Excellent presentation, interpretation and evaluation of concepts or evidence, facilitating a highly logical, coherent and balanced development of judgements or arguments. Strong awareness of other stances.
Good presentation, interpretation and evaluation of concepts or evidence, facilitating a logical and coherent development of judgements or arguments that shows awareness of other stances.
Adequate presentation, interpretation and evaluation of concepts or evidence, facilitating a largely logical and coherent development of judgements or arguments. An emerging awareness of other stances.
A limited use of concepts or evidence to support emerging judgements or arguments, although not always logical or coherent and with inaccuracies.
Largely descriptive work, with limited effort made to use concepts or evidence to develop judgements or arguments. Information accepted uncritically, with unsubstantiated opinions evident.
Descriptive work with no effort made to use concepts or evidence to develop judgements or arguments. Views expressed are often illogical, invalid or irrelevant. Minimal or no use of evidence to back up views.
Work is largely irrelevant or inaccurate, characterised by descriptive text and unsubstantiated generalisations. Complete lack of evidence to back up views.
Application of theory to practice (for courses with a professional practice element)
Excellent application of theory to practice, with the student making highly appropriate, developed and articulated links between the two.
Sound application of theory to practice, with the student making appropriate, well-developed and articulated links between the two.
Consistent and accurate application of theory to practice, with the student making appropriate links between the two.
Relevant theoretical knowledge and understanding applied in practice, but with students not always making logical links between the two.
Limited understanding of the application of theory to practice, with the student often not making appropriate links between the two.
Weak understanding of the application of theory to practice, with only occasional evidence of the student making appropriate links between the two.
Very weak theoretical knowledge and understanding, with no evidence of appropriate application in practice.
Reading and referencing
Critical engagement with a wide range of relevant reading, including research-informed literature where relevant. Consistently accurate application of referencing.
Engagement with a wide range of relevant reading. Sound application of referencing, with no inaccuracies or inconsistencies.
Engagement with an appropriate range of reading beyond essential texts. Referencing may show minor inaccuracies or inconsistencies.
Evidence of reading, largely confined to essential texts, but mainly reliant on taught elements. Referencing may show inaccuracies and/or inconsistencies.
Poor engagement with essential texts and no evidence of wider reading. Heavily reliant on taught elements. Inconsistent and weak use of referencing.
Limited evidence of reading and/or reliance on inappropriate sources. Limited engagement with taught elements. Very poor use of referencing.
No evidence of reading or engagement with taught elements. Absent or incoherent referencing.
Presentation, style and structure *
Highly effective presentation of work that is coherently structured and clearly expressed throughout.
Competent presentation of work in terms of structure and clarity of expression.
Work is structured in a largely coherent manner and is for the most part clearly expressed.
Ordered presentation in which relevant ideas / concepts are reasonably expressed.
Work is loosely, and at times incoherently, structured, with information and ideas often poorly expressed.
Work is poorly presented in a disjointed and incoherent manner. Information and ideas are very poorly expressed, with weak English and/or inappropriate style.