Case Options (lecturer approval required) 1. Forrest v ASIC (2014) 2. ASIC v Citigroup (2007) 3. ASIC v Soust (2010) 4. North v Marra Developments Ltd (1981) 5. Fame Decorator Agencies Pty Ltd v Jeffries Industries Ltd (1998) 6. Gambotto v WCP Ltd (1995) 7. Northside Developments Pty Ltd v Registrar-General (1990) 8. Permanent Trustee Australia Ltd (as Trustee of Advance Property Fund) v Stout and Others (1999) 9. Nassar v Innovative Precasters Group Pty Ltd (2009) 10. McGellin v Mount King Mining NL (1998) 11. Beck v Weinstock (2013) 12. Kinsela v Russell Kinsela Pty Ltd (in liq) (1986) 13. ASIC v Hellicar (2012) 14. ASIC v Lindberg (2012) 15. Shafron v ASIC (2012) 16. ASIC v Healey (2011) 17. Vines v ASIC (2006) 18. ASIC v Adler (2002) 19. Brunninghausen v Glavanics (1999) 20. ASIC v Rich (2003) 21. ASIC v Parker (2003) 22. ASIC v Loiterton (2004) 23. ASIC v PFS Business Development Group Pty Ltd (2006) 24. Hall v Poolman (2007) 25. ASIC v Australian Investors Forum Pty Ltd (No. 2) (2005) 26. State of South Australia v Marcus Clark (1996) 27. ASIC v Vizard (2005) 28. ASIC v McDonald (No.11) (2009) 29. ASIC v NRMA (2002) 30. ASIC v Plymin (2003) 31. ASIC v Cyclone Magnetic Engines Inc (2010) 32. ASC v MacLeod (2000) 33. Biodiesel Producers Ltd v Stewart (2007) 34. AXA Asia Pacific Holdings Ltd v Direct Share Purchasing Corporation Pty Ltd (2009) 35. Wilson v Manna Hill Mining Corporation Pty Ltd (2004) 36. Wenzel v ASX Ltd (2002) 37. R v Rivkin (2004) 38. Kwok v R (2007) 39. Isak Constructions (Aust) Pty Ltd v Faress (2003) 40. Capricornia Credit Union Ltd v ASIC (2007) Group presentation and assignment Assessment and Feedback Form Group Members: 50% presentation and visual slides Written Assignment: Identify the facts of the case Written Assignment: Explain the relevant law relating to the case Written Assignment: Discuss the legal arguments raised by the parties in case Written Assignment: Summarise the judgement of 10% 10% 10% 10% Written Assignment: Illustrate the role, purpose and scope of the relevant court, or 10% ASSESSMENT TOTAL 100% SUBJECT TOTAL /40% Criteria High Distinction presentation and 80% - At all times: 1. the group was cohesive and courteous; 2. the oral presentations were clear and understandable; 3. the oral Distinction 70%- 79% At all times: 1. the group was cohesive and courteous; 2. the oral presentations were clear and understandable; 3. the oral Credit 60-69% Most of the times: 1. the group was cohesive and courteous; 2. the oral presentations were clear and understandable; 3. the oral Pass 50-59% Some of the times: 1. the group was cohesive and courteous; 2. the oral presentations were clear and understandable; 3. the oral