Argument-Strong Law Assignment Help with Proper Case Referencing

IRAC - Offer and Acceptance: Issue - whether an advertisement was an offer or invitation to treat. Rule - Partridge v Crittenden treats ads as invitations. Application - language indicated intention to be bound on clear performance similar to Carlill which supports unilateral offer. Conclusion - likely an offer where promise is conditional on performance and intention is explicit.

Consideration - Practical Benefit: Williams v Roffey Bros allows practical benefit as good consideration where there is no duress and promisor gains efficiency or avoidance of penalty. Apply facts to identify concrete benefits like avoiding delay costs.

Remedies: Damages aim to place claimant in expectation position subject to remoteness in Hadley v Baxendale and mitigation. Specific performance is discretionary and suited to unique goods or land.

Homicide Mens Rea: Direct intent per Moloney or oblique intent per Woollin where death is a virtual certainty and appreciated as such. If only foresight of risk, consider gross negligence manslaughter using Adomako test.

Self Defence vs Duress: Self defence requires necessity and reasonable force under Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008. Duress unavailable for murder per Howe.

Theft Structure: Dishonestly appropriates property belonging to another with intention to permanently deprive. Use Ivey for dishonesty.

Duty of Care: Apply Caparo - foreseeability, proximity, and fair just and reasonable. Use Robinson to avoid novel duty errors.

Donoghue Note: Neighbour principle and the foundation of modern product liability.

Nuisance vs Rylands: Nuisance is unreasonable interference with land use. Rylands focuses on escape from non natural use.

Sovereignty vs Rule of Law: Present Dicey then modern constraints via HRA interpretation, devolution, and constitutional conventions.

Judicial Review Grounds: Illegality, irrationality, procedural impropriety, plus proportionality and legitimate expectation where relevant.

Miller Note: Limits on prerogative where it frustrates statute, with clear remedy analysis.

Directors Duties: s171 to s177 including s172. Apply conflicts, disclosure, and remedies.

Veil Piercing: Rare per Prest. Prefer statutory or agency routes. Use evasion principle logic.

Minority Remedies: Derivative claim for wrongs to company, unfair prejudice for member interests under s994.

Direct Effect: Use Van Gend. Directives are generally vertical only. Support with Marshall and Faccini Dori.

Cassis and Keck: Mutual recognition and rule of reason, then selling arrangements carve out in Keck.

Services Scenario: Identify restriction, justification, proportionality, and less restrictive means.

Article 8 Balancing: In accordance with law, legitimate aim, necessity, and proportionality.

Proportionality Steps: Legitimate aim, rational connection, minimal impairment, fair balance.

Positive Obligations: Assess protective duties and margin of appreciation with practical constraints.

Sources Overview: Article 38 ICJ Statute - treaties, custom, general principles, and subsidiary means. Custom requires state practice and opinio juris.

State Responsibility: Attribution, breach, and remedies. Consider circumstances precluding wrongfulness where relevant.

Use of Force: Article 2(4) prohibition with Article 51 self defence subject to necessity and proportionality.

Best Interests: Apply welfare checklist including needs, harm, effect of change, and parental capability.

Financial Remedies: s25 factors including needs, resources, contributions, and standard of living with fairness framing.

Protective Orders: Identify relevant statutory route and apply urgency, evidence, and proportionality.

Easements: Creation by express grant, implied grant, prescription. Apply Re Ellenborough Park characteristics.

Lease vs Licence: Street v Mountford on exclusive possession. Sham labels do not defeat substance.

Adverse Possession: Schedule 6 procedure, factual possession, intention to possess, and notice steps.

Three Certainties: Intention, subject matter, objects. Identify uncertainty and conclude on validity or resulting trust.

Constructive Trust vs Estoppel: Choose based on common intention and reliance, versus assurance and flexible remedies.

Fiduciary Remedies: No conflict and no profit rules. Consider disclosure, consent, and available equitable relief.

Unfair Dismissal: s98 ERA, potentially fair reason, reasonableness, and Burchell for misconduct.

Discrimination: Identify protected characteristic, comparator, PCP, and justification where needed.

Redundancy: Genuine redundancy, fair selection, consultation, alternative roles, and remedy analysis.

Unfair Terms: Assess reasonableness under UCTA and fairness under CRA. Consider transparency and prominence.

Competition Outline: Identify agreement or abuse, define market, assess object or effect, and consider exemptions.

GDPR Bases: Map purpose to lawful basis and check necessity, transparency, and proportionality.