Course: LLB [Hons] law -3rd Year-Top-Up Module Code: LW2125
Module Title: Alternative Dispute Resolution
Semester One First Sit and Resit 2023-2024 Type of assessment: Coursework
This assessment aims to evaluate your understanding and application of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) principles, relevant concepts, theories, and the legal framework behind it. You will demonstrate your ability to analyse and apply these concepts in the coursework scenarios below. This assessment constitutes 80% of the overall module mark and requires application of independent study to complete.
The Assessment Pack includes a detailed assignment brief, guidance on how, where, and when to submit is provided on this page. If you require additional support, please refer to the services detailed in this document.
Assessment Questions
Choose ONE out of the two case-based questions below and present a clear, well-structured analysis in your response. Integrate case laws, pertinent concepts, principles, and theories to corroborate your analysis, showcasing a comprehensive understanding of your selected question.
Case 1. Mark Gallagher is the CEO of a family-run business in the UK that manufactures pneumatic equipment for the automotive industry in Europe and America. Mark has a history of being frugal and prudent in investing his family's money in new projects.
Giselle has worked for Mark as Head of Sales for the past five years. Additionally, she has 15 years of experience selling pneumatic equipment across Europe. Besides English, she is fluent in Spanish, Mandarin, and French. She believes that setting up a factory in Guangzhou, China, will reduce the per-unit cost of the equipment, leading to substantial profits.
To get her proposal approved, Giselle prepares a detailed project report (with information on estimated expenses and return on investment) for Mark. She is confident that this new factory will generate profits and help maintain a competitive edge against other competitors in Europe and America. However, during her presentation, she does not focus on the benefits of the new factory. Instead, she emphasizes the negative effects of not investing in this new project. Additionally, she explains that she and her team have invested around 1000 hours in planning this project in detail. At the same time, she establishes that her experience will be useful in getting this project started.
After the presentation, Mark seems convinced! He approves the project and appoints Giselle as the Chief Operations Officer responsible for Supply Chain Management and Product Management in China.
Upon receiving her offer letter, Giselle promptly visits Mark to request a salary raise. Prior to the China assignment, her annual income was 120,000. Now, she contends that her job has become more demanding and seeks a 50% raise. The industry norm for intra-company transfers to jurisdictions like China typically involves a 35% raise. Faced with limited options, Mark reluctantly agrees.
Identify the psychological influence(s) used by Giselle to get her project approved.
Find out the cognitive bias/behavioural heuristics that may have impacted the decision-making ability of Mark Gallagher?
Using principles of game theory, discuss Giselle's strategy towards her salary raise?
Case 2. On January 10, 2020, Jane Foster, Director of XYC (a private limited company in England manufacturing gaming computers) contracted with Gajendra Singh, CEO of ABC (a multinational company based in India specializing in affordable high-quality GPU units, with offices in the US and Australia).
According to the contract terms, Gajendra was bound to furnish 100,000 GPU units at 250 per unit. The total contract price covered transportation expenses to the United Kingdom. Jane, acknowledging the international bulk order, was obligated to advance 50% of the total contract price, a commitment she met on 19 January 2020. In reciprocation, Gajendra pledged to deliver the items within three months of receiving the advance.
Logan/Laura James, Jane Foster's solicitor, recommended incorporating a tiered dispute resolution clause in the contract. The clause stipulated that in the event of a dispute, the parties must attempt negotiation first. If negotiation proved unsuccessful within 30 days, the parties were then obligated to mediate with the Civil Mediation Council as the designated mediation provider. If mediation did not yield a favourable outcome, the parties were to arbitrate the matter in London, under LCIA rules. The substantive contract was governed by English law (including the arbitration clause).
However, before Gajendra could fulfil his contractual obligations, the Covid-19 pandemic emerged, leading to government-induced lockdowns of non-essential businesses followed by the closure of ports. Consequently, Gajendra was unable to perform his contractual duties. In April 2020, initial phone call negotiations between the parties proved unsuccessful. Despite Jane's persistent attempts to communicate via mail, Gajendra responded rudely, asserting that no resolution was possible.
Jane sought a full refund of the advance payment but faced resistance from Gajendra. He made references to the non-refundable payment clause in the contract that said once the advance payment is made, it becomes non-refundable, even in the event of order cancellation.
Furthermore, Gajendra firmly asserts that, due to investments made to process the order, the full contractual amount must be remitted, and delivery will occur once ports reopen. In case of non-compliance, Gajendra has expressed an intention to pursue litigation in India, disregarding the dispute resolution clause. Furthermore, he has accused Jane of being inconsiderate. Additionally, it's important to note that the contract had a 'force majeure clause,' encompassing government lockdowns as an event excusing contractual performance until the force majeure event ceases.
You are Logan/Laura James, and Jane is your important client. Jane has asked you four questions over email, and you are required to answer them with reference to case law, relevant principles and scholarly discussions. Critically analyse:
1. Why was it necessary to include a tiered dispute resolution clause in the contract before any dispute arose?
2. Can Gajendra initiate litigation in India, and how will English courts interpret the dispute resolution clause?
3. What is mediation and how is it helpful in this scenario? Can it be held online?
4. Should mediation prove ineffective; how does arbitration serve as a means for Jane to attain justice?
N.B. If you are being reassessed, you must not attempt the same case-based queston as chosen for your first sit.
How, when, and where to submit:
Assessment Release date: The Turnitin link on Blackboard, the link will be visible to you before: 17 February 2024
Assessment Deadline Date and time: 25 March by or before 12pm UK time
Please note that this is the final time you can submit not the time to submit. You should aim to submit your assessment well in advance of the deadline.
Your feedback/feedforward and provisional mark for this assessment will be provided via Turnitin- Date and time: to be confirmed
Submission Details
The word limit is 2500 words (there is no 10% tolerance permitted on this limit).
Please submit via Turnitin using 12-point font and double line spacing.
You should include appropriate footnotes and a bibliography.
All citations to cases, statutes, books, journals and websites used (with the date last accessed specified) must be fully referenced using the OSCOLA style reference guide.
Declare the word count honestly and accurately on the e-cover sheet. Anything beyond the agreed word limit will not be read.
Only submit a Word Document version of your assignment not a PDF versions
Preparing for your assignment.
Refer to the blackboard Module Information Pack to understand the Learning Outcomes and Marking Criteria. The learning for this assessment spans all lectures and workshops. The reading list is also available on Blackboard and in the module materials.
Feedback Guidance:
Reflecting on Feedback: how to improve.
From the feedback you receive, you should understand:
The grade you achieved
The best features of your work
Areas you may not have fully understood
Areas you are doing well but could develop your understanding.
What you can do to improve in the future - feedforward
Use the WISER: Academic Skills Development service. WISER can review feedback and help you understand your feedback. You can also use the WISER Feedback GlossaryNext Steps:
List the steps have you taken to respond to previous feedback.
Summarise your achievements
Evaluate where you need to improve here (keep handy for future work):
Course: LLB [Hons] law Module Code: LW2125
Module Title: Alternative Dispute Resolution
Semester Two: First Sit and Resit 2023-2024 Type of assessment: Presentation
This assessment aims to evaluate your understanding and application of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) principles, relevant concepts, theories, and the legal framework behind it. You will demonstrate your ability to analyse and apply these concepts in the presentation topics below. This assessment constitutes 20% of the overall module mark and requires the application of independent study to complete. The Assessment Pack includes a detailed assignment brief, guidance on how, where, and when to submit. If you require additional support, please refer to the services detailed in this document.
Presentation topics
Choose ONE out of the four presentation topics from below and prepare a pre-recorded presentation (i.e., a video recording with PowerPoint). You must integrate principles of ADR, theories, and case law where necessary. Present a clear, well-structured analysis in your response, showcasing a comprehensive understanding of your selected question.
N.B. You are required to upload this presentation on BB. Please note this should be a single file upload. For submission guidelines and timeframe, refer to page 2 of the document.
Choose ONE out of the Four topics:
The advantages and disadvantages of Mandatory Mediation
International Commercial Arbitration as a tool to resolve cross-border commercial disputes
Why do Negotiations fail? What are the barriers to efficient resolution of disputes?
What is ADR and its various processes? Why is it useful for disputing parties?
N.B. If you are being reassessed, you must not attempt the same presentation topic as chosen for your first sit.
How, when, and where to submit:
Assessment Release date: The Turnitin link on Blackboard, the link will be visible to you before: 11 March 2024
Presentation Deadline Date and time: by or before 19 April
Please note that this is the final time you can submit not the time to submit. You should aim to submit your assessment well in advance of the deadline.
Your feedback/feedforward and provisional mark for this assessment will be provided via Turnitin- Date and time: to be confirmed
Submission Details
The time limit for this assignment is 30 minutes.
Footnoting (for slides) is not required. However, you must include hyperlinks while citing data (or where necessary).
All presentations must provide a list of references towards the end.
Only submit a PowerPoint version of your slides
For advice on the use of Artificial Intelligence, please refer to Categories of AI tools guidance. For this assignment you are permitted to use:
Translation Software
Paraphrasing Tools
Preparing for your assignment.
Refer to the blackboard Module Information Pack to understand the Learning Outcomes and Marking Criteria. The learning for this assessment spans all lectures and workshops. The reading list is also available on Blackboard and in the module materials.
Assessment Outcomes:
When marking the assignment, we are looking for evidence that you have achieved the following assessed outcomes:
OUTCOME HOW TO DEMONSTRATE THE OUTCOMES IN THIS ASSESSMENT WEIGHTING (INDICATIVE ONLY)
AO1 Understanding
Your legal knowledge You can retrieve, explain, and apply relevant, and up-to-date, legal authority.
Your work demonstrates an accurate explanation and definition of legal rules (and where appropriate principles and standards and their underlying values). 40%
AO2 Applying
Your range and depth of analysis and evaluation You can analyse the legal issues and draw conclusions using appropriate legal evidence to create a persuasive argument.
You can show some of the limitations of the both the claims you make, and the evidential base used to support them. 30%
AO3 Researching
Your range of sources, citations and referencing All sources of evidence, such as law (cases and statutes), books, journals, and web-based sources, are cited fully and accurately in accordance with the OSCOLA style guide.
Your work contains a complete and accurate bibliography, in line with the style outlined in OSCOLA guides. 10%
AO4 Communicating
Your structure, style, spelling, grammar, and punctuation Your work contains an introduction, a legal argument organised into distinct sections which addresses the question set, and a concluding section which should restate your answer to the question set.
Your work is legible, coherently expressed and articulates a clear, structured legal argument, and is free from grammatical, punctuation and spelling errors. 20%
Marking Criteria:
Classification: How to demonstrate: Banded marks
Outstanding
1st The answer demonstrates exemplary and profound handling of the question with performance which would be first-class at a much higher level than that of the assessment level. A high level of intellectual rigour and insight will be demonstrated. 100
Excellent
1st The answer demonstrates 1st class performance at a level higher than that of the assessment level (so for LLB year 1, it would be a first at year 2 level; for a final year LLB, a distinction at Masters level) 95
87
Very good
1st The answer demonstrates a very good handling of the question with both a broad and deep grasp of the issues. The answer is coherent, well evidenced and well-argued and demonstrates very good evaluation. The presence of marginal inaccuracies should not preclude a first class mark. 80
74
Good
2.1 The answer demonstrates a good handling of the question in a largely accurate manner with limited significant errors or omissions. The answer contains material relevant to the question. There is familiarity with a range of appropriate sources and, at the top of the boundary, evaluation of the more complex issues and solid evaluation of all other issues. 68
65
62
Competent
2.2 The answer demonstrates competent knowledge and understanding of the issue(s) in the question in a broadly competent manner. The required learning outcomes will be adequately met. The student will show some awareness of the main sources. There is an attempt to identify and select relevant materials. May contain limited evaluation. 58
55
52
Basic
3rd The answer demonstrates some basic relevant knowledge and understanding of the subject matter. The answer may be mostly descriptive and may be supported by some relevant sources. The answer will meet the required learning outcomes at a threshold level only. Mistakes should not prevent an answer qualifying for a pass. The answer may miss key points, contain important inaccuracies and make assertions not supported by authority or evidence. 48
45
42
40
High fail
Marginal / weak The answer demonstrates limited knowledge and/or understanding. 35
30
Very weak
Fail The answer demonstrates very limited knowledge and/or understanding 25
Low fail The answer demonstrates almost no relevant knowledge and understanding, eg at the lower end of the bracket the student may just write a few sentences, at the higher end, there may be a discussion of facts alone. 10
0
Feedback Guidance:
Reflecting on Feedback: how to improve.
From the feedback you receive, you should understand:
The grade you achieved
The best features of your work
Areas you may not have fully understood
Areas you are doing well but could develop your understanding.
What you can do to improve in the future - feedforward
Use the WISER: Academic Skills Development service. WISER can review feedback and help you understand your feedback. You can also use the WISER Feedback GlossaryNext Steps:
List the steps have you taken to respond to previous feedback.
Summarise your achievements
Evaluate where you need to improve here (keep handy for future work):
