Consumer and Competition Law (Semester 2, 2023)

Name Case Study BLAW2010- Marker Rubric

Description e AGLC/Chicago evidenc
issues in
style.
Rubric Detail
sources.
Levels of Achievement Most orHowever,

Below there
Criteria Expectations
Adequate this indepen
Case Study. was failure to
Expectations dent iden
2 points of the
(Fail) tify a
2.5 points sources num
Structure, Oto 2 points Reading& ber
research of
points (eg
Answer other
clarity of provide key
expression & The assignment shows no issue
an attempt s.
Answer reading
Research of
(5 /40) primary
Referencing and organization to the
the Unit
point that lacks structure some structure but evidence of
assignment in to organise the Meets
sources
any
Expectations
- where
communication is (Credit)
material
demonstrate
steps are not
impeded. clearly s
Meaning is appropriate 3 to 3 points
relevant
distinguished Assignment has
) and/or
unclear and/or and/or interna a structure but
independent
could be there are tional the order of
organised in a law discussion of
frequent more limited principles or
sources.
logical grammatical reading of application to
manner. Meaning sources facts is
and/or spelling sometimes
(5/40)
apparent, but illogical/inconsi
errors. stent. Language
Referencing - as is always research (eg Identificati mainly fluent.
fluent. required and on Grammar and
Some errors of topic points spelling mainly
expected of the materials or accurate.
to 2.5
grammar and/or Several sources
a reading of points
question of information
spelling. Some are referenced
answered is attempt failure to but some
Issues (5/40)
at prim sources are not
absent or largely ary referenced, or
referencing/citation sourc references are
absent. Poor of cases There
es not complete
and AGLC/Chicago was a (eg pinpoint
legislation but synth
poor/la references
compliance. esise missing).
referencing may be such ck of
Referencing is
u and
generally
ns cases
consistent, with
ys (whe
te Some only minor
re
m deviations from
of the
a the
infor
ti main AGLC/Chicago
mati
c on. issues referencing
or relev system.
n ant) have
ot and/
fo been
or
ll identifi
o Answ
w cation
th does of 3 to 3 points
not Answer shows
inter evidence of
natio adequate
identifi
nal reading of topic
law ed. the materials and
synthesises
show main
information from sources other than lecture than lecture is organized 4 to 5 points
materials. Answer shows some evidence of materials. in a logical Answer in this
independent research (eg reading of primary Answer shows manner and category
sources - where relevant) and/or evidence of discusses demonstrates
international law sources. Or answer shows some the issues adequate
only very limited research. independent well. Each reading of topic
research (eg step is materials and
reading of clearly synthesises
primary distinguishe information
3 to 3 points Most of the main issues arising
sources - d. Fluent from sources
out of the Case Study have been identified.
statutes and good to other than
Some would have required further
relevant cases, excellent lecture
explanation/expansion.
where writing materials.
relevant) style.Gram Answer also
and/or mar and shows evidence
international spelling are of adequate
law sources. accurate. independent
Exceeds All sources research (eg
Expectations of reading of
(Distinction) 3.5 to 3.5 information primary sources
points Clearly are - statutes and
identifies and referenced. relevant cases,
3.5 to 3.5 points Assignment has a good
defines most Referencing where relevant)
structure and each step is clearly
of the is and/or
distinguished. There could be some consistently
problems and international
improvement in the logical flow of analysis. accurate
outlines them law sources.
Demonstrates with the
in an efficient
fluent writing style AGLC/Chica
manner.
Grammar and spelling mostly accurate. I
go
Most sources of information are I
referencing
referenced. Referencing is mainly Exceeds
style. Cases
consistent, with only minor deviations from Expectations: 4 to 5 points
and
the AGLC/CHicago referencing style. Cases (High
legislation All the main
and legislation cited accurately, or mostly Distinction)
are cited issues arising in
cited accurately. properly. the Case Study
4 to 5 points are identified
3.5 to 3.5 points Answer shows evidence of Assignment and are outlined
adequate reading of topic materials and shows a good in an
synthesises information from sources other structure and exceptional
manner.
https://lms.curtin.edu.au/webapps/rubric/do/course/manageRubrics?
dispatch=view&context=course&rubricld=_ 64766_ 1&course_id=_103378_ 1
 Identification of o to 2 points 2.5 to 2.5 points 3 to 3 points 3.5 to 3.5 points 4 to 5 points
legal
There was a poor Most of the legal All of the main legal
principles & Some of the legal Most of the legal
relevant statutory or lack of principles were clearly principles have been
principles have principles have been
law & case identification of any identified and discussed identifies and
been identified. identified. However,
Law legal principles. There Most of the relevant outlined/ discussed in
However, there was there was failure to
(5/40) was a poor legislation and case law an exceptional manner.
failure to identify a identify others which
or lack of identification were clearly identified All of the relevant
number of other were important to the
of relevant legislation and discussed legislation and
key legal princiles. discussion of the Case
and a lack of use of appropriate case law
Some relevant Study. Most of the
case law. have been identified
legislation has not relevant legislation
been identified nor have been identified. and discussed.
discussed. There However, there was
was also a lack of failure to identify
identification of other sections
relevant case law. legislation as well as
case law.

7.5 to 8.5 points A 9 to 10 points

coherent analysis is A coherent analysis is
based on partial based on thorough use of
use of relevant relevant information, 12 to 15 points A
information, concepts and cases (as coherent and
concepts and cases the question requires). 10.5 to 11.5 points A complete analysis is
(as the question Effective coherent and based on complete
requires). Effective recommendations comprehensive use of all relevant
0 to 6.5 points The recommendations analysis is based on and appropriate
and/or plans of action
analysis is not and/or plans of were partially provided. thorough use of information,
Analysis of the coherent and is action inadequate. relevant and
Specific data or facts concepts and
legal issues, the based on irrelevant Specific data or were occasionally appropriate cases(as the
application of information, facts were not referred when information, question requires).
the law, the referred when
concepts and cases necessary to support concepts and cases Effective
discussion and necessary to
(as the question the analysis and (as the question recommendations,
coherence of support the
the student's requires) Effective conclusions. requires). Most of solutions, and/or
recommendations analysis and the plans of action were
line of conclusions.
reasoning given and/or plans of recommendations, provided. Specific
to support the action not solutions, and/or data or facts were
answers. provided. Specific plans of action referred when
Consideration data or facts were provided. necessary to support
of the necessary to However, some the analysis and
arguments for support the were unsupported conclusions.
and against the analysis and or did not support
application of legal conclusions was the analysis and/or
rules (application) not provided. conclusions.
(15/40)
 Consumer and Competition Law (Semester 2,2023

Meets
Expectations (Pass)
Levels of Achievement
Below 2.5 to 2.5points Meets Expectations
Expectations (Credit)
Exceeds Expectations Exceeds Expectations:
(Fail) The conclusion
(Distinction) (High Distinction)
and summary
3 to 3 points
0 to 2 points shows some ability
Criteria to summarise the The conclusion and 3.5 to 3.5 points
4 to 5 points
The conclusion and main arguments summary of the main There is a very good
summary show a and shows how arguments and issues summary of the There was an excellent
general lack of the conclusion was are well written and main arguments summary and synthesis
conceptual reached. show a good ability to and issues. The of the main issues and
understanding, or no synthesise the conclusion shows a arguments. There was
Conclusion conceptual arguments and make a very good also a very good
and summary understanding. understanding of conceptual
reasonable and well
of the main There is a failure to thought out conclusion. the law and the understanding of the
arguments appropriately ability to draw issues which resulted in
(conclusion) summarise conclusions which a well written
(5/40 arguments. are logical . conclusion.
https://lms.curtin .edu.au/webapps/rubric/do/course/manageRubrics?dispatch=view&context=course&rubricld=_ 64 766_ 1 &course _id=_ 103378_ 1