Submission instructions:
1.   You r case note is to be typed and submitted in HARD COPY to  Law Reception (Level 3) by 6 pm
Friday 12
th
September 2014   (earlier is fine).
2.   You r case note must have a UTS:Law cover sheet attached to the front of the task (these are
available at Law Reception). This cover sheet must be completed (with an accurate word count)
and you must sign the  honesty declaration. If you do not do so your case  note will not be
marked.
3.   You are also required to submit your case note assessment task in Turnitin. You must then
attach the most recent Turnitin report to the hardcopy that you submit to Law Reception by
6pm Friday 12 September 2014.
4.   You must not  submit your case note by email or fax. These will not be accepted. Tasks must be
received and date – stamped by Law Reception by the due date and time to be eligible for
marking.
5.   No late assignments will be accepted (unless you have obtained a formal extension from the
course coordinator).
6.   Late assignments will be penalised by 5% of the marks for the assessment task per day
(including weekends) that the assignment is late (unless you have obtained a formal extension
from the subject coordinator).
7.   Formal extensions must be applied for BEFORE the due date. If you are seeking a short term
extension (ie no more than one week) because you have suffered an illness or unexpected
circumstances then you must complete the UTS:Law Request for Extension Form and attach
supporting documentation to support your request. If you are seeking a longer extension (more
than one week) because you have been affected by a serious illness, extenuating circumstances
then you must apply for special consideration. In both cases you mu st provide appropriate
supporting documentation to support your request. Please remember a ‘request’ does not
mean that you have been granted an extension –   it is only when the subject coordinator has
formally advised you whether or not this has been grant ed that you will know whether you have
an extension.
8.   Referencing (citations and any footnotes) must be in accordance with the Faculty’s preferred style
which is set out in the Australian Guide to Legal Citation  (MULR Assoc, 3
rd
ed, 2010).

Task:
You are to  read   the following extract from  Cole v South Tweed Heads Rugby  League   Football Club
Ltd  (2004) 217 CLR 469, 469 -492 and write a case note on the basis of this extract only.
This extract includes  three judgments only   –  by Gleeson CJ, McHugh J and  Gummow and Hayne JJ.

You are not  required to read the judgments by Kirby J and Callinan J.
You are not  required to undertake any additional research to complete the case note  –   a careful
and close reading of the case is all that is required to complete t his task.

The case note  must  include the following elements   (we recommend that you use these headings) :
Introduction  (including accurate case citation , and identification of the parties ):  Briefly identify
the case by party name and citation, the  parties to the litigation and an overview of the nature of
the legal issue (s).
Procedural history:   Is it an appeal from a first instance decision or have there been a series of
appeals? Provide details from first instance decision to the present case the subject of the case
note .
Facts:  What are the circumstances which gave rise to the dispute? You should only detail the facts
which are relevant to the legal issue(s) that the court is considering. Identify the parties clearly and
be consistent. For example avoid referring to the applicant, plaintiff, aggrieved party or party by
name interchangeably (judges often do this but it doesn’t mean we can).
Legal issues:  What  is the legal issue(s) that the court is addressing in this decision?  Is the dispute
about de fining specific circumstances when a particular legal principle may be relevant ? For
example, consider whether the circumstances give rise to a duty of care, and if so, has there been a
breach of that duty; or whether a particular term in a contract be interpreted in a specific way and
if that term has been breached based on that interpretation.
Decision:   What is the outcome of the case? Was it a unanimous or majority decision (ie did the
judges agree)? What was the basis of the decision (ie the ratio)  –   explain this in your own words.
Analysis:   Here you should provide a brief discussion of the reasoning of the court.  Do you find it
persuasive? If there was a dissent  –   how was this different to that of the majority? Were there any
policy implications underpinning the decision? What were these? What implications do you think
this decision has for future cases?