LAWS1012 TORTS – SEMESTER 2, 2023

SHORT RELEASE ASSIGNMENT (REPLACEMENT)

Due Date: 16 October 2023, 9am Closing Date: 22 October 2023, 9am

INSTRUCTIONS

1. This assignment is a compulsory assessment task worth 30% of your final mark. Students must make a
satisfactory attempt to pass the unit of study.

2. The assignment question should be treated as confidential. You must not distribute this paper to anyone,
or share it with anyone in any way, either before or after the due date.

3. Please note that you are not permitted to work collaboratively on this assignment. Your answer is to be
entirely your own work. Your assignment will be subject to analysis by software to detect similarities with
the work of other students. To be clear: do not discuss the assignment topic with any other student, and
do not show your draft or final assignment to any other student until results are released. It is important
that you generally understand and comply with the University’s Academic Integrity requirements (LINK).
Do not incorporate text from course notes you have not prepared personally into your response.

4. Word Limit: A maximum word limit of 1500 words applies. Students must provide a word count at the end
of their assignment, either by noting the number of words used or including a screenshot of the word
count as shown in Microsoft Word. The total word count excludes footnote numbers; references/citations
in footnotes; any cover page material; and any text indicating your word count. It must include body text;
headings and sub-headings; quotations; and any text other than numbers and citations in footnotes.
Misrepresentation of your word count may be treated as academic dishonesty. A piece of assessment
which exceeds the prescribed word limit will attract a penalty of 10% of the total marks available for the
piece of assessment for every 100 words, or part thereof. The word limit will be strictly applied; there is no
leeway.

5. Referencing: All sources relied upon should be cited in footnotes compliant with the Australian Guide to
Legal Citation (4th ed, 2018) (LINK). Because references/citations in footnotes do not count towards the
word limit, there is no excuse for corner-cutting in this regard. A bibliography is not required.

6. Preparing & Submitting Your Assignment Online: You must submit your assessment as a Word file (.doc,
.docx). Submissions made in other formats (eg, .pdf) will not be marked and you will receive zero for the
task. Please note that corrupt files with garbled text will not be marked. Use your SID as the filename, eg,

1
 SID_AssessmentName_LAWS1012. Do not include your name anywhere on your file, only your SID. Put
your SID and the unit of study code/title on each page of your assignment in a header or footer, and
number each page of your assignment. If you have multiple files, please merge all your files into one file
before submitting. Once submitted, you will see a confirmation note that your assignment has been
submitted. Canvas will not automatically email you a digital receipt so please check for the confirmation
note.

7. Late Submissions: The late submission of a piece of assessment without an approved extension will attract
a penalty of 10% of the total marks available for the piece of assessment per calendar day or part thereof.
For example, a submission at 2pm or 11:59pm on the date of submission will attract a 10% penalty. A
submission at or after 12 midnight will attract a 20% penalty, and so on. Late penalties will be strictly
applied; there is no grace period.

8. Assessment Criteria: The criteria to be applied in the marking of the assignment are set out in the Unit
Outline on Canvas.

9. The Aims of this Assignment: This is a problem-based assignment and not a research task. It is designed
to test your problem-solving ability – ie, your ability to identify and analyse legal issues arising from a
hypothetical fact scenario. It aims to test your understanding of the cases and legislation set out in the
reading guide, and discussed in classes, although the best answers may follow up issues by reference to
recommended texts and other scholarly sources as appropriate (eg, where they offer an opinion on a
contested point of law). You should answer with reference mainly to primary sources (ie, cases and
legislation) and not to secondary sources. It is inappropriate to quote or cite lectures or the reading guide.
You should support your answer with pinpoint citations to relevant paragraphs or pages of sources relied
upon.

10. Coverage: This assignment seeks to test your understanding of aspects of the material listed in the reading
guide under topics 2-7 inclusive, and your response should only address principles of tort law related to
these topics. Not all material in these topics will necessarily be relevant to the problem. The identification
of relevant issues is a key skill being tested in this assessment. As indicated by the assignment question,
you should not consider the tort of negligence (ie, the material in topic 8 onwards).

2
 QUESTION

Joel, who has just turned 16, cuts himself on a rusty nail while out and about with friends in his home town in
country NSW. He is taken by his mother, Kathy, to see the family’s long-standing general practitioner, Dr
Shallow, who stitches up the wound. It emerges that Joel has never been immunised against tetanus, and Dr
Shallow recommends that vaccination via intramuscular injection take place on the spot. However, Joel objects
to this. He declines to explain his reasons because he does not think he will be taken seriously, instead simply
saying that he is not comfortable with what is being proposed. However, his hesitancy reflects concerns about
the efficacy and safety of vaccines that he developed as a result of following public debate during the COVID-19
pandemic and discussing these matters extensively with his father, Chet, who is Kathy’s estranged ex-husband.

After further discussion between the parties, involving Kathy and Dr Shallow attempting to persuade Joel that
vaccination would be advisable, Kathy tells Dr Shallow to proceed, which she does. Joel offers no verbal
agreement to this, although Dr Shallow later says that he ultimately nodded and presented his arm when she
went to administer the injection. Joel, for his part, denies that this occurred.

Afterwards, Dr Shallow explains her decision to proceed with the injection as follows: ‘I’ve known Joel his
whole life and he’s a smart kid. However, he needed that shot to avoid a serious risk to his health. His mother
agreed, and I think in the end he did too.’

Later in the week, Chet learns of these events and is furious about what he sees as a significant violation of his
son’s bodily autonomy. He creates an email account using a fake name and sends the following message to Dr
Shallow’s work address:

UR CAREER IS OVER AND THAT’S NOT ALL I’M GONNA END I’M WATCHING U

Dr Shallow has just finished seeing patients for the day and is sitting at her computer when this email arrives,
so she views it immediately. She is so disturbed that she locks the door of her consulting room and remains
there for two hours before eventually deciding that it is probably safe to go home.

The following day, Chet puts on a balaclava and hides in some bushes near the carpark behind Dr Shallow’s
surgery, knowing that Dr Shallow’s car is there. Shortly after close of business, Dr Siska, who is both colleague
and significant other to Dr Shallow, emerges from the surgery’s back door. Thinking, in the twilight, that Dr
Siska is Dr Shallow, Chet leaps out of the bushes and runs towards him, yelling incoherently. Dr Siska sees Chet
coming and shuffles backwards, tripping over a step and breaking his hip. Chet then realises that Dr Siska is not
in fact Dr Shallow and veers off, abandoning his plans for violence and fleeing the scene. Dr Shallow, who
happens to be standing at a window overlooking the carpark at the time, is traumatised by witnessing what Dr
Siska is subjected to, and develops a psychiatric illness as a result.

3
Discuss any liability in tort potentially arising on these facts, confining your attention to the examinable topics.
Do not consider negligence as a cause of action.