Tort of Negligent Misstatement - Law Assignment Help

Assignment Task

QUESTION ONE:
Shannon is looking to open a florist shop in a heritage listed building situated adjacent to the Richmond railway station. The building has previously been used as a post office, but is now unoccupied and is being offered for sale.
Before making an offer to buy the property, Shannon phones the Hawkesbury City Council to investigate the current zoning. She speaks to Ben, a receptionist, who informs Shannon that all of the planning advisors are currently busy. Shannon says she is in a hurry and Ben responds that his belief is that, if a post office has previously been operating in this building, then it should be fine to use it for another commercial use. Ben also gives Shannon the email address for one of the planning officers.
The next day Shannon writes up her query regarding the zoning of the post office building in a letter, signs it and emails it, as an attachment, to the planning officer.
The following week Shannon receives a formal response from the planning officer, on council letterhead, stating that the building referred to is currently zoned commercial mixed-use and therefore a florist business would be within the permitted uses.
On the basis of this letter, Shannon makes an offer to purchase the property, and this is immediately accepted.
It turns out the planning officer mixed up Shannon’s request with another property and the building is actually zoned residential, with a one-off special use permit provided to the operator of the post office. It now looks unlikely that Shannon would ever be able to operate a florist business in this building. Further, the proximity to the noisy railway station, renders the property undesirable for residential use, meaning that Shannon would only be able to sell the property for significantly less than she originally paid for it.
Advise Shannon on the likelihood of success in bringing an action against the Hawkesbury City Council for negligent misstatement.

QUESTION TWO:
Blake is an aspiring amateur astronomer. After recently completing a 4-week astronomy course at the Sydney Observatory, he has decided it is time to upgrade his telescope so he can see more stars and planets in the night sky.
He recalls that, at the end of the course, the lead astronomer had recommended Heavenly Bodies as a good place to get a telescope, and that they offer a 10% discount to students of the course.
The following day Blake goes to Heavenly Bodies to check out their range of telescopes. After browsing for a few minutes he is greeted by Ella who asks whether he needs any assistance. Blake explains that he is looking for a tripod-mounted telescope that he can use at home. Blake also says that it is very important that the telescope allows him to see the rings of Saturn, which are of special interest to him.
Ella explains that the Tele6000 would be the perfect model for him and takes Blake over to the display. She tells him that the Tele6000 is one of the most powerful telescopes ever made for home-enthusiasts, and that it would easily allow him to study the rings of Saturn. Based on Ella’s glowing recommendation, Blake buys the Tele6000 for $1,950.00, after the 10% discount.
At the counter, Blake notices that there are microscopes on sale. He has also been keen to check out the microfauna in his fish pond at home, so he chooses the Micro2000 which has been marked down by 50% to only $250.00.
As he is leaving the store, Blake sees a sign that states:
Please choose your items carefully. As these instruments are finely crafted scientific tools, no returns will be permitted and Heavenly Bodies accepts no responsibility for items purchased that do not meet your needs.

ALL SALES ARE FINAL.
After using the Tele6000 for three weeks, Blake is disappointed, as this model is clearly not powerful enough to see Saturn’s rings, and he is only able to use it for 20 minutes at a time before the internal lamp heats up so much that it starts to burn his face. The tripod mount has also broken. When he contacts Heavenly Bodies to get a replacement part, they inform him that these tripod mounts are no longer available as the Tele6000 is being discontinued.
He is also having issues with the Micro2000. The lens seems to be permanently fogged up, making it impossible to see any detail. He has contacted the manufacturer and they have advised him that it sounds like the microscope must have got wet sometime after delivery to the shop as they are always delivered to retail outlets in waterproof and airtight boxes. When Blake attempts to return the microscope to Heavenly Bodies his request is denied, and he is referred to the sign in the store that he had previously noticed stating that all sales were final and no returns were permitted.Advise Blake whether Heavenly Bodies has breached any of the provisions of the Australian Consumer Law, including any relevant consumer guarantees, and if so, what remedies Blake may be entitled to. Ensure that you support your answer with any applicable case law or statute.

QUESTION THREE:
Tyson operates a tree-lopping business as a sole trader. He has been hired by Sarah to come and remove six trees from her backyard as she is worried that when the next big storm comes some of the branches might fall on her house or into the neighbours’ yards.
On 1 May 2021, Tyson comes to assess the trees and provides a quote to Sarah of $1,500.00 which she accepts. The next week he brings his truck full of equipment and an assistant, Abby, recently employed by Tyson, to start the job.
Before he starts cutting any of the trees down he decides to go and speak to the next-door neighbours.
The neighbour on the southside is home and Tyson explains that he will be cutting down some trees and that there is a risk that one of the branches could land in their backyard. The owner of the house, Jackie, says that she appreciates the warning and will now go and move the table and chairs which are sitting in the middle of the yard so they don’t get damaged.
The neighbour on the northside is not home so Tyson decides to just be extra careful with the trees close to their yard.
At 1pm Tyson and Abby start cutting the trees down. During the afternoon the following mishaps occur:
at 2pm Abby is cutting a branch which she has failed to secure properly, such that it falls into the neighbour's yard on the northern side, squashing a small apricot tree and breaking the large terracotta pot in which it was growing.
by 4pm the wind has picked up but Tyson decides to continue work. One of the branches he cuts blows onto the roof of Sarah’s house and smashes one of her newly installed solar panels.
At 4.30pm Tyson cuts a branch that blows into the neighbour's yard on the southern side and damages the table and chairs which were still sitting in the middle of the yard. When Jackie hears the crash of the branch she realises she had forgotten to move the table and chairs. She runs out the back to assess the damage but while she is out there part of the branch that hit Sarah’s solar panels blows off the roof and into Jackie’s yard striking her on the arm leaving a large cut that requires 10 stiches.
Advise Tyson of his potential liability under the tort of negligence and whether he has any defences available.

This Law Assignment has been solved by our Law experts at My Uni Paper. Our Assignment Writing Experts are efficient to provide a fresh solution to this question. We are serving more than 10000+ Students in Australia, UK & US by helping them to score HD in their academics. Our Experts are well trained to follow all marking rubrics & referencing style.
Be it a used or new solution, the quality of the work submitted by our assignment experts remains unhampered. You may continue to expect the same or even better quality with the used and new assignment solution files respectively. There’s one thing to be noticed that you could choose one between the two and acquire an HD either way. You could choose a new assignment solution file to get yourself an exclusive, plagiarism (with free Turnitin file), expert quality assignment or order an old solution file that was considered worthy of the highest distinction.