Test 1

LAW210
Clara Edithia Siahaan

1. F
2. T
3. F
4. T
5. F
6. T
7. D
8. B
9. C
10. A

Essay Section

Question 2
a) Explain in details the three arms of government who makes the law. [15]
1. Legislature is basically the arm of the government who is responsible for making law. In
most countries, the legislature takes the form of a parliament.
2. Executive is the arm of government who is responsible for administering the law. In most
countries, the executive government takes the form of a council of ministers overseeing a
public service.
3. Judiciary is the arm of government who is responsible for interpreting the law. In most
countries, the judiciary takes the form of a system of courts.
In other words, the government has legislature who makes law, executive who administers
law and judiciary who interprets law.

b) Please explain about the concept of the separation of powers. [5]

Western political theorists support the concept of separation of powers in which the
legislature, the executive and the judiciary should as far as possible remain functionally
separate. In which these mean that the same person should not form part of more than one of
the 3 arms of government; one arm of government should not control or interfere with the
functioning of another arm; and one arm should not exercise a function of another arm.
Test 1
LAW210
Clara Edithia Siahaan

Question 3
a) Define the meaning of statutory interpretation. [2]
Statutory interpretation is where judges interpret the meanings of words in a statute to
determine and classify if and how it will apply in similar or different cases. Sometimes the
words of a statute have a plain and a straightforward meaning. But in many cases, there is
some ambiguity in the words of the statute that must be resolved by the judge. The nature of
language; “The proper definition of a word, as opposed to its lxical definition found in
dictionaries.. is fixed by how that word is actually used in practice.”

b) Please explain the differences between the 3 approaches to statutory interpretation. [18]
Statutory interpretation concerns the role of judges when trying to apply an Act of Parliament
to an actual case. The wording of the Act may seem to be clear when it is drafted and
checked by Parliament but it may become problematic in the future. 75% of cases heard are
concerned with statutory interpretation. Suppose a law bans smoking in all public places.
Undoubtedly, it will cover airport waiting room, classrooms and restaurants. They are
considered to be “public places” in the normal sense.
There are also 3 main rules of statutory interpretation that judges use to decide a case;
1. Literal approach
The courts are to interpret the words used in an Act of Parliament literally as far as they
can, for example they must give the words their natural, ordinary and grammatical
meaning. This is based on the assumption that Parliament’s intention is expressed in the
actual words used. In other words, it is the plain meaning of the wordings. It is also an
approach to statutory interpretation which the court is to give a strict interpretation to the
intention of Parliament as set out in the words actually used in the statute.
2. Golden rule
According to the golden rule, the courts were to interpret legislation in a manner which
avoided obvious absurdities or inconsistencies. Obvious printing mistakes or simple slips
were aside and the courts read legislation as if these errors were not there. Thus the court
has the right to adjust a literal meaning of wording if it would lead to absurdity or
irrationality or illogicality. Circumstances of use;
Test 1
LAW210
Clara Edithia Siahaan

It is a compromise between the plain meaning (or literal) rule and the mischief rule like
the plain meaning rule, it gives the words of a statute their plain, ordinary meaning.
However, when this may lead to an irrational result that is unlikely to be the legislature’s
intention, the judge can depart from this meaning. The second use of the golden rule is in
a wider sense, to avoid a result that is obnoxious (intolerable, horrible) to principles of
public policy, even where words have only one meaning.
3. Mischief rule (misbehavior, trouble, disobedience)
It is used when literal approach is not possible, due to ambiguity (uncertainty,
vagueness), logical defective (imperfect, flawed), inconsistency or incomplete.
The Mischief Rule is a certain rule that judges can apply in statutory interpretation in
order to discover Parliament’s intention. It is essentially needed to ask the question; what
was the “mischief” (any trouble, or even disruption) that the previous law did not cover.
Smith v Hughes, also see Heydon’s case. The courts have given the rule a limited
operation exhibiting a preference for the literal rule. They have usually applied it only
when there is some clear ambiguity or uncertainty in the statute.

Question 4
ESIA, a telecommunication provider, makes an advertisement that anyone who makes a call
to another within the same service provider between 12am-5am will get a 90% discount on
the call rate. Oliver called his friends several hours every day during that time, and he
actually only gets 50% discount. Advise the situation. [20]
Issue :
Can Oliver sue ESIA?

Facts :
ESIA is a telecommunication provider who makes an advertisement that anyone who makes
a call to another within the same service provider between 12AM-5AM will get a 90%
discount on the call rate. Oliver then called his friends for several hours during that time
every day. However, he only got 50% discount instead of getting 90%.
Test 1
LAW210
Clara Edithia Siahaan

Application of Law :
An offer must be stated or being delivered in a way that one would lead to a reasonable
person to expect a binding contract to arise from its acceptance. It is also a promise to do or
refrain from doing something in exchange for something else. The person making the offer
must intend that it can be converted into a binding obligation by acceptance.

Here are the rules of offer:

1. Communication
The offer must be communicated, however communication is not an issue in here.

2. Invitations to treat
The offer must be distinguished, however invitations to treat is not an issue in here.

3. Can be made to a person or a group or the world

The offer must become liable to anyone performing the condition. The contract itself
shows that the contract is made to the world with that specific class of the public coming
forward. The necessary conditions in the reliance of the advertisement. In this case,
Oliver did called his friends during that specific time which was 12-5AM in the morning
every day. Thus, there is a contract here since a contract would only be made with that
specific class of the public coming forward and and performing the necessary conditions
in reliance of ESIA advertisement. It is very obvious in this case that Oliver did all the
necessary conditions for the purpose of getting the 90% discounts since the calls should
be made between 12AM-5AM when this is the bedtime for people. People should get a
rest at this time. However, Oliver did something that is very inconvenient. Instead of
having a good night sleep, Oliver did something that is very inconvenient for him, he felt
all the displeased feeling by calling his friends at those hours and not getting the
discounts he wanted it to be. Thus, based on these arguments, I will assume that there
was an offer here. Instead of getting 50% discounts, Oliver should get all 90% discounts
as he has performed the conditions and felt all the inconvenience by doing all the
Test 1
LAW210
Clara Edithia Siahaan

conditions. An offer is a proposal by one party to enter into a legally binding contract
with another. It involves an indication that the offeror is willing to be bound by a contract
if the offeree accepts. An offer can only exist if there is a firm promise to do or refrain
from doing something. The person making the offer must intend that it can be converted
into a binding obligation by acceptance.

4. The offer must be distinguished from enquires for information.

Offer must be distinguished from options. Clearly that this is not an issue in here. It is not
asking enquires for information.

Decision :
This is an offer. ESIA did make an advertisement that anyone who makes a call to another
within the same service provider between 12AM-5AM will get a 90% discount on the call
rate. Oliver should get 90% discounts as he has performed all the conditions and felt all the
inconvenience by doing all the conditions.

Question 5
John always wants to buy a good jeep. So, one day, he goes to a car showroom.
Situation:
The price of the car is written AUD 35,000. John likes the car and decided to buy. The
salesman says it is actually increased to AUD 35,800. Can John sue? Focus on whether there
is an offer in this situation. [20]

Issue :
Can John sue?

Facts:
John wants to buy a good jeep and it is written AUD 35,000. However, the salesman says it
is increased to AUD 35,800.
Test 1
LAW210
Clara Edithia Siahaan

Application of Law:

One person can not come to agreement with another unless the intention (meaning) of both
parties is disclosed, one in the form of an offer and the other in the acceptance of that offer.
An offer is a proposal by one party to enter into a legally binding contract with another. It
involves an indication that the offeror is willing to be bound by a contract if the offeree
accepts. An offer can only exist if there is a firm promise to do or refrain from doing
something. The person making the offer must intend that it can be converted into a binding
obligation by acceptance.

Rules of Offer:

1. The offer must be communicated. It must be clear that Randy communicated with the
salesman, this is not an issue in here.
2. The offer must be distinguished from invitations to treat.

It is important to distinguish an offer which will give rise to binding obligations on

acceptance from an ‘invitation to treat’, i.e. an indication of willingness to deal or trade. An
invitation to treat is essentially an initial approach to others inviting them to make an offer
which may or may not be accepted. It is generally stated that goods on display in a self-
service shop generally do not constitute an offer to sell. It is generally accepted that goods on
display in a shop constitute an invitation to treat rather than an offerThe shop need not
accept the customer’s offer to buy and has the right to refuse to sell to the customer. The
display of an article in a shop window, even with a card indicating its price, is not generally
an offer but merely an invitation for someone to enter the shop and make an offer of
purchase. A prospective (potential) purchaser makes the offer to purchase which the
shopkeeper may either accept or reject; the shopkeeper can not be compelled to sell the
article. Thus it is also applied in this case. The price of that was written AUD12,000 and the
salesman suddenly increased the price before there is an agreement (contract) between them.
There is not an offer in this situation. The salesman was just trying to make an invitation to
Test 1
LAW210
Clara Edithia Siahaan

treat to Randy to make an offer. See Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain v Boot Cash
Chemist. However, this is an issue in here.

3. Can be made to a person, a group or to the whole world (for example; by way of general
advertisement). This is not an issue general advertisement or an offer to the whole world.
4. The offer must be distinguished from enquires for information. Offer must be distinguish
from options. Clearly that is not about asking enquiries for information.

Decision: This is not an offer. It is only an invitation to treat thus Randy cannot sue the
salesman.