Torts Law Assessment: Duty of Care Submissions in Court Spring

Written submissions component

The Torts Law Assessment (Spring 2025) focuses on the concept of duty of care under negligence law. Students are required to prepare both written submissions and oral advocacy that mirror real-world legal practice in the Federal Court of Australia. This assessment emphasizes procedural accuracy, courtroom professionalism, and critical understanding of negligence principles.

Written Submissions Component

• Format Requirement: Students must use Federal Court Form 1 (general jurisdiction format).

• Guidance: Procedural completion will be demonstrated in Week 6 classes. Students should begin substantive drafting prior to Week 6.

• Word Limit: Equivalent to content deliverable within a five-minute oral submission, including full case and legislative citations. Students are encouraged to practice delivery with a timer.

• Submission:

  • Upload to Turnitin (via vUWS) by 9:00 am, Monday 8 September 2025.

  • Purpose:

    • Academic integrity check (avoiding plagiarism, AI misuse).

    • Professional skills training in drafting official court forms.

• Penalty: Failure to submit will result in a mark of 0/30.

Oral Submissions Component

This task replicates the advocacy role of a junior practitioner in real court settings.

• Duration: Maximum five minutes (timed). Judges will stop submissions that exceed the limit.

• Preparation:

  • Watch the exemplar video on vUWS to understand proper courtroom etiquette.

  • Practice timed delivery; edit to comply with court directions.

• Materials Permitted:

  • Written submissions and paper notes.

  • No electronic devices at the bar table.

• Format:

  • Students will be assigned as Plaintiff (Survival Generation) or Defendant (Minister for Transport, Betty Boomer).

  • Submissions must be grounded in relevant case law and legislation.

  • Assessment strictly limited to the duty of care element of negligence (not breach, damage, causation, or defences).

Advocacy Skills Assessed

• Compliance with judicial directions.

• Clarity, conciseness, and persuasiveness of submissions.

• Demonstrated ability to respond to questions from the bench.

• Professional demeanor and adherence to courtroom etiquette.

Court Directions

The Federal Court Judge has issued clear directions:

• Submissions Focus: Whether a duty of care arises under the facts provided.

• Scope of Categories: Limit arguments to duty categories studied in Weeks 3–5:

  • Ordinary negligence cases

  • Physical injury by omission

  • Mental harm

  • Professional-client duty

  • Pure economic loss by negligent act or misstatement

  • Novel categories

Case Scenario (Facts)

• Defendant: Betty Boomer, Federal Minister for Transport.

• Decision: Approved importation of the StudMaster GTX Extreme vehicles (manufactured in the USA).

• Key Features of Vehicles:

  • Extra-large 4WD design, close to truck classification.

  • Diesel-fuelled, 5x higher emissions than standard private vehicles.

  • Exclusive black paint causing extreme heat absorption.

  • Excess particulate emissions, raising respiratory health concerns.

  • Already banned in Europe, Asia, and South America for environmental and safety reasons.

• Claimants: Survival Generation (activist group, ages 18–25).

• Allegation: Minister owes a duty of care to the public in approving imports that significantly harm climate, air quality, and public health.

Summary of Assessment Requirements

The Torts Law – Submissions in Court Assessment (Spring 2025) focused on the legal principle of duty of care under negligence law. Students were required to prepare both written submissions and oral advocacy to replicate real-world Federal Court practices.

Key Pointers of the Assessment:

• Written Submissions:

  • Use Federal Court Form 1 format.

  • Word limit equivalent to a five-minute oral delivery, including citations.

  • Upload via Turnitin by 8 September 2025.

  • Ensure procedural accuracy and academic integrity.

• Oral Submissions:

  • Five-minute maximum presentation before judges.

  • Must focus only on duty of care, excluding breach, causation, or defences.

  • Rely on case law, legislation, and duty categories studied in Weeks 3–5.

  • Professional courtroom etiquette required.

• Assessment Criteria:

  • Compliance with judicial directions.

  • Clarity, persuasiveness, and conciseness.

  • Ability to handle judicial questioning.

  • Professional demeanor.

• Case Scenario:

  • Defendant: Minister for Transport (Betty Boomer).

  • Issue: Whether approving harmful vehicles created a duty of care breach to the public (environmental and health concerns).

  • Plaintiff: Activist group Survival Generation (18–25 years old).

Step-by-Step Guidance by Academic Mentor

The academic mentor guided the student through the assessment in a structured process:

1. Understanding the Task

   • Mentor explained the distinction between written submissions and oral advocacy.

   • Clarified the exclusive focus on duty of care, preventing unnecessary discussion on breach, causation, or defences.

2. Structuring Written Submissions

   • Guided the student to format the document as per Federal Court Form 1.

   • Helped identify relevant duty of care categories (ordinary negligence, professional-client duty, omissions, pure economic loss, novel categories).

   • Emphasized including full case and legislative citations for credibility.

3. Case Analysis

   • Worked with the student to analyze the StudMaster GTX Extreme vehicle facts.

   • Drew parallels to environmental harm, public health risks, and government liability in previous duty of care cases.

   • Encouraged framing arguments from both plaintiff and defendant perspectives to strengthen critical analysis.

4. Developing Oral Submissions

   • Trained the student to condense written arguments into a clear, persuasive five-minute script.

   • Practiced timed delivery to meet judicial directions.

   • Simulated questioning from the bench to build confidence in handling challenges.

5. Professional Skills Training

   • Reinforced courtroom etiquette: formal address, composure, and respect for judicial directions.

   • Highlighted the importance of persuasiveness and conciseness in advocacy.

Final Outcome

By the end of the mentorship:

• The student produced a well-structured written submission compliant with Federal Court requirements.

• Oral advocacy was delivered within five minutes, persuasive, and legally sound.

• The student demonstrated understanding of duty of care principles and applied them effectively to the case scenario.

Learning Objectives Achieved:

• Application of negligence law – duty of care in a practical litigation context.

• Development of professional drafting skills using court documentation.

• Enhancement of oral advocacy and critical thinking skills.

• Mastery of courtroom etiquette and judicial compliance.

Get Access to This Assignment Solution – Reference Only

Looking to strengthen your understanding of Torts Law – Duty of Care? You can download this sample solution to see how legal principles are applied step by step. This resource is designed to help you structure your own assessment and improve your academic writing skills.

Important Note: This sample is for reference and study purposes only. Submitting it as your own work may lead to plagiarism issues. Universities strictly check for originality, so always use samples as a guide and create your own version.

If you want to avoid plagiarism and secure better grades, our team of professional academic writers can prepare a fresh, 100% plagiarism-free, custom-written solution tailored to your topic, university guidelines, and deadlines.

Benefits of Ordering a Fresh Assignment Solution:

• Original, plagiarism-free work checked with Turnitin

• Written by qualified subject experts

• Customized as per your requirements and marking rubric

• Delivered on time with unlimited revisions

Learn from samples, but always submit unique, high-quality work that reflects your own academic progress.