BLAW 5064 LAW FOR ENGINEERS BENTLEY

SEMESTER 1, 2020
MAJOR ASSIGNMENT
Due: 11th May @1pm by upload to Turnitin 3500 words limit.

50 Marks

See instructions below under ‘Your Tasks’. You will complete an individual assignment on the
scenario below. It requires you to explain and demonstrate the appropriate principles (and key
cases) relevant to material covered in Topic 6 (negligence).

Source: Ferrari SPA

Roman’s Classic Workshop manufactures classic automotive engineering equipment and is a leading
industry supplier in Australia and New Zealand. The Roman ‘Wolf’s Tooth’ (WT) high performance
power steering conversion system is a very popular product that has been sold and supplied
throughout the region for several years. The WT is a discreet power steering system suitable for
classic cars that were fitted with manual steering when new and has more feel and accuracy than
electric power steering systems that are also popular. The WT’s popularity is based on its small
pump and neat pipe work and fittings. It is also a compact design which makes it suitable for
restricted spaces that are common in classic cars.

Cliff has been an employed by Roman’s Classic Workshop as a production line quality controller since
February 1999. His duties include the inspection of componentry prior to installation in finished
products. One day a pallet with several power steering pumps was delivered to Roman’s for
inspection and authorisation for production. Cliff had a very causal glance at one of the pumps
(which appeared satisfactory) and signed off the production approval certificate but did not inspect
the other pumps. Had he done so, Cliff would have realised that some of the pumps were faulty
because an important hydraulic fitting was machined incorrectly and would potentially be hazardous
if fitted to a car as hydraulic fluid would leak almost immediately once operating. During early 2020,
Roman’s combined these particular pumps along with other ancillary parts to a manufacture a batch
of WT’s and sold the complete units through online and face to face sales.

In March 2020, local resident and car enthusiast Cliff purchased a WT to install in his classic and very
valuable 1980’s Ferrari GTO. He has been busy modifying his car so he can enter it in the upcoming
Targa West motorsport event and wanted easier steering that would allow him to be faster in tight
sections of the course such as hairpin bends. He read the installation instructions that clearly stated,
‘once installed, pump should be checked for any leakage of hydraulic fluid prior to driving on road or
track.’ Although he had never installed a power steering system into a road car, Cliff considered
himself most proficient and fitted the WT to his Ferrari rather than engaging an accredited engineer
to perform the installation. He didn’t like the look of some of the hydraulic fittings but continued the
installation regardless. Sometime later when he test drove the car, Cliff suffered a power steering
failure resulting in a serious collision with a bus shelter. He sustained non-life-threatening injuries
although his car was extensively damaged. The damage to his car was later estimated at $110000 as
the Kevlar panels on the left side of his car were damaged and were not able to be repaired. In
addition, Cliff has ongoing medical and rehabilitation expenses to pay for. He will also be unable to
return to work as a Civil Engineer at a major Perth construction company for a considerable length of
time. It was later discovered that Cliff’s WT was one of the faulty units supplied by Roman’s.

Your task:
Question 1:

Using the 4-step process discuss whether Roman’s Classic Workshop will be liable to Cliff in the Tort
of Negligence. (35 marks)

Question 2:

Using the 4-step process discuss whether there are any common law defences available to Roman’s
Classic Workshop? Assume for the purposes of this question that they have been found liable to Cliff
in the Tort of Negligence even if you did not find them responsible (15 marks).

Note: This question should be considered using the common law. There is no need to refer to
Occupational Health and Safety legislation for example.

Submission: Via Turnitin. Instructions for submission via Turnitin are on Blackboard. Submit your
answer as ONE Microsoft Word document (no PDF’s).

Note: The word count is not to exceed 3500 words.

Assessment Rubric:

Question 1
Area of law: 0 marks; Principles of law: 17 Marks; Application to facts: 14 Marks; Conclusion: 1 Mark;
Referencing and general presentation 3 marks.

Question 2

Area of Law (0 marks) Principles of Law: 7 marks; Application to facts: 5 marks; Conclusion 1 mark;
Referencing and general presentation 2 marks.

(Write in ways appropriate to the discipline, purpose and context concisely and effectively,
appropriately referenced. Properly apply the four-step process.)

Please note:

1. Late papers incur a penalty of 5% marks for day 1 or part thereof late and 10% for each day after.

2. Exceeding word count limits will result in deduction of marks.

3. Reference correctly using the Chicago method.

4. Name your document correctly in the following format: “SurnameStudentNumberAssignment2.”

5. You may wish to check your submission using the Turnitin but remember your final upload is the
version that will be marked. 6. Bibliographies are not included in the word count.

END OF ASSIGNMENT DOCUMENT