Case Study – Part 1

October 15, 2022 0 Comments

Case Study – Part 1
All the questions and requirements are in the “Assignment-Part 1. pdf” that I provided, please browse it carefully and complete the assignment according to it.
You don’t have to write exactly 1000 words as it said in the PDF, that’s the maximum words, and 700-800 words is appropriate.

Case Study – Part 1
Question 1
Jerome and Marvis are in a partnership type of business. Under the Partnership Act of 1963, a partnership entails a business structure that involves two or more people who conduct business together. Marvis and Jerome are engaged in similar business engagement.
The Thin Ice- the Hip Hop Experience” needs to be formed procedurally. In this case4, the partnering parties need to get into a consensus on the type of partnership to engage in (Nisar, 2007, p. 17). Consequently, the partners need to enter into a partnership agreement that can be prepared by a lawyer. The partnership agreement explained and defines the role of each partner, the financial contribution of every partner, the procedure to be adopted in solving disputes and the procedure of resigning or ending the partnership. Moreover, upon signing the partnership the relevant partners need to make the required federal or state registration of the partnership before beginning their business operations.
Question 2
Jason argues that he had been discriminated based on his gender in the hiring process at Thin Ice. In this case, Thin Ice did not unlawfully discriminate Jason in the application for the position (Prenzler, Flerming and King, 2010, 589). It is illegal to discriminate an employee based on their origin, regio0n, gender, and race. However, in this case, it was a job position that the employer viewed that it would be appropriate to be filled by a female thus it does not amount to discrimination as it was just a requirement for the job position.
In the case, that Jason wants to file a discrimination complaint then he needs to report it to the Equal Opportunity Commission (Prenzler, Flerming and King, 2010, p. 586). The Equal Opportunity Commission gives complaint handling services to ensure that workers issues on discrimination are addressed.
Question 3
Based on the principles distinguishing between independent contractors from employees then Thin Ice is correct in denying the responsibilities of paying for damages caused by Suzie on Harry`s property. First, harry works as a contract at Thin Ice (Durban, 2010, p. 33). The contractor is different from the employee in that they are self-employed and they offer their services to organization or businesses for a fixed compensation. Consequently, the principles that guide the relationship between the contract and the contracting business that make the contractor liable for the damages in this case include that the two parties are on temporary relationship, the contractor works independently, the contractor makes decision on time and place of work, and the contractor is paid from the proceeds of the project they engage in. Therefo0re, the employers are not liable to the acts of the independent contractors unless in the cases that the work is an inherently dangerous activity.
Question 4
Based on the agency law Thin Ice is obligated to pay the outstanding balance and thus Jasper needs not to refund the deposit he received from Suzie a representative of Thin Ice. Under the agency law, a consensual re3lationship exists being created by the law of contract and in this case one party (principal) gives the other party (agent) to act on behalf of and under the control of the principal to deal with the third parties (Lan and Heracleous, 2010, p. 301). Suzie acted in the position of the Thin Ice to the third party (Jasper) and thus such contract was binding. The agency principle that the agent has the full authority to work and act on behalf of third parties makes it possible for them to engage in any reasonable interacts and contracts with third parties. Therefore, Thin Ice needs to pay for the balance of $500 to jasper and finalize the contract.
Question 5
Marvis argues that he is not responsible for the extra cost incurred by the football club for hiring a DJ in late hours for the failure of Jason informing him of the contract. Legally, Jason and Marvis are in a partnership and thus they are personally liable for the losses and other liabilities made in the course of doing business. The action of one party affects the other and thus the action of Jason affects Marvis and thus both of them are liable for the loss. The fact that Marvis asserts that he is not liable to the extra costs them can mean an end to the partnership.

Durban, D.W., 2010. Independent Contractor or Employee?. SC LAW., 21, pp.31-34.
Lan, L.L. and Heracleous, L., 2010. Rethinking agency theory: The view from law. Academy of management review, 35(2), pp.294-314.
Nisar, T.M., 2007. Risk management in public–private partnership contracts. Public organization review, 7(1), pp.1-19.
Prenzler, T., Fleming, J. and King, A.L., 2010. Gender equity in Australian and New Zealand policing: a five-year review. International journal of police science & management, 12(4), pp.584-595.