Discuss the scenario with your group and determine who will play each of the following roles:

My roles:
1.1 Complainant
1.5 Prosecutor

1st page : write summary for both roles
2nd page : repair questions for both roles

Swinburne University of Technology
PEH30001 Health and Environmental Law 2
2015 Moot court Assessment Task
Total Marks 20%
In week 12 you are to participate in a moot court in relation to the scenario posted on
blackboard. To carry out the moot, students have been divided into groups on
Blackboard, and allocated a time when your group will perform the moot. In each of
your groups you are required to do the following:
1. Discuss the scenario with your group and determine who will play each of the following
roles:
1.1 Complainant
1.2 Environmental Health Officer
1.3 Food premises proprietor
1.4 Analyst
1.5 Prosecutor
2. Statements for the complainant, environmental health officer and analyst and the charge
summons sheet are located on blackboard (Moot court scenario). There is no statement for
the proprietor as they are to be cross examined.
3. To ensure that each participant has the opportunity to demonstrate his or her skills and
knowledge, each participant will be required to play roles that may involve:
3.1 presenting the prosecution case to the court (as the role of the prosecutor);
3.2 examining a witness (as the role of prosecutor or defence lawyer); and/or
3.3 giving evidence as a witness in the prosecution or defence case.
The details regarding how this will be achieved is contained in next section.
4. The moot court will be conducted as follows:
4.1 Each group will be called individually to conduct the activity in front of a magistrate
( Kylie!). It should take approximately 30 minutes per group. Your group time is
allocated on blackboard.
4.2 The person nominated as the prosecutor will present the charges to the Court
and outline the case for the prosecution.
4.3 The complainant will give evidence (as a witness for the prosecution) –
prosecutor to examine.
4.4 The environmental health officer will give evidence (as a witness for the
prosecution) – analyst to examine (as the role of the prosecutor).
4.5 The analyst will give evidence (as a witness for the prosecution) – proprietor to
examine (as the role of the prosecutor).
4.6 The proprietor will give evidence (in the defence case) – complainant to
examine (as the role of the defence lawyer) and then the environmental health
officer to cross examine (as the role of the prosecutor).
4.7 Judgment/questions (to be carried out by the Magistrate, Kylie)!
5. How do I prepare for the moot?
5.1 Once you have selected your role, keep in mind that you will have two roles to
perform.
5.2 For each of these roles, you need to review the moot court scenario provided on
blackboard and decide what questions you would need to ask or you would likely
to be asked if you are:
5.2.1 prosecuting the case (as a prosecutor, including questions you may ask
of the magistrate and of a witness);
5.2.2 defending the case (as a lawyer for the defence, including those you may
ask of the magistrate and of a witness); and/or
5.2.3 acting as a witness (as either the complainant, EHO, analyst or
proprietor).
5.3 For the moot exercise, make sure you have your list of questions, or appropriate
responses ready for the roles you have played.
5.4 This assessment for this exercise is individual, however you are encouraged to
brainstorm the questions pertaining to your roles with your group or even practice
the moot with the your group in preparation for the exercise.
6. How will you be assessed?
Each student will be individually marked based on:
6.1 Their performance in the moot. The ability to present evidence, cross examine
witnesses, display knowledge of court etiquette, respond to magistrate etc
(remember your role will give you the opportunity to do this).
Total Marks = 10%
6.2 Individual written submission (one page maximum) covering the following points:
i. Brief summary of the case including an overview of the two roles you
prepared for the moot.
ii. The list of questions that you prepared for your allocated role for the moot
for the role as prosecutor or defence lawyer. That is, for the role when you
examine or cross examine a witness. For example, if your role is the
complainant (as per 1.1), the list of questions will be for your role as
defence lawyer examining the proprietor (as per 4.6). If your role is the
analyst, the list of questions will be for your role as prosecutor examining
the environmental health officer.
iii. General considerations regarding court etiquette that may be relevant to a
prosecutor and the environmental health officer.
Total Marks = 10%
The written submission as outlined in 6.2 is due by 5 pm on Tuesday October 27,
by 5.00 pm (before class commences)., via the assessment link on
blackboard.

Swinburne University of Technology
Scenario
FORM 3
Magistrates’ Court Criminal Procedure Rules 2009
Rule 11
Charge-Sheet and Summons
(To be Filed at Court after Service)
Informant and Witnesses’ Unsuitable Dates
…………………………………………………………………………….
…………………………………………………………………………….
Preferred Dates
…………………………………………………………………………….
…………………………………………………………………………….
TO BE FILED AT COURT AFTER SERVICE
To the
Accused
James White
42 Garden Road
Collingwood
VICTORIA
Postcode 3042
M

F Date of Birth
1/01/1979
Registration No. State
You have been charged with an offence.
Read these pages to see what you must do. Licence No. State
Details of the charge against you
What is the chargesheet?
(Description of offence)
1 On 10 September 2010, at Collingwood, you sold food, namely a
loaf of bread, that was unsuitable contrary to section 12(2) of the
Food Act 1984
PARTICULARS
A cigarette butt was found embedded in the loaf of bread
Under what law? State Act Other Specify
C’wealth Reg.
Act or Regulation No.
10082/1984
Section or Clause (Full Ref)
12(2)
Are there more charges? No Yes – See “Continuation of Charges” attached
Type of offence  Summary offence  Indictable offence
Request for committal
proceeding  No  Yes
Who filed the chargesheet(s)?(Informant)
M Green
Authorised Officer Agency Ref: NYC:5197652
Agency and Address Good Governs City Council
c/- Harpies Lawyers, 140 William Street, Melbourne 3000
Phone: 9288 0555 Email: m.green@goodgoverns.com.au
Fax No: 9288 0666
Signature of informant Date
Filed at
Date
Where will the case be heard
Address
The Magistrates’ Court at Melbourne
233 William Street Melbourne
Phone No. 9628 7777
When Time
10.00am
Day
24
Month
October
Year
2010
Details about this summons
Issued at Date
Issued by (Signature)
 Registrar
 Magistrate
 Member of police force
 Prescribed person
FORM 2 Court ref.
Continuation of Charges
Magistrates’ Court Criminal Procedure Rules 2009
Rule 11
(To be Filed at Court after Service)
Page No. 2
TO BE FILED AT COURT AFTER SERVICE
Person Charged James White, 42 Garden Road, Collingwood, VICTORIA, 3042
2 (Description of offence)
On 10 September 2010, at Collingwood, you failed to comply with a requirement imposed upon
you by the Food Standards Code in relation to the conduct of a food business contrary to
section 16(1) of the Food Act 1984.
PARTICULARS
You did not maintain the food premises to the standard of cleanliness required under section
19(1) of Division 5 of Food Standard 3.2.2.
State Act Other Specify
C’wealth Reg.
Act or Regulation No.
10082/1984
Section or Clause (Full Ref.)
16(1)
 Summary offence  Indictable offence
Request for committal
proceeding
 No  Yes
3 (Description of offence)
On 10 September 2010 at Collingwood you failed to comply with a requirement imposed upon
you by the Food Standards Code in relation to the conduct of a food business contrary to
section 16(1) of the Food Act 1984.
PARTICULARS
You did not store potentially hazardous food at the food premises under temperature control as
required under section 6 of Division 3 of Food Standard 3.2.2.
State Act Other Specify
C’wealth Reg.
Act or Regulation No.
10082/1984
Section or Clause (Full Ref.)
16(1)
 Summary offence  Indictable offence
Request for committal
proceeding
 No  Yes
Are there any more
charges? No Yes – see page no. 3
Signature of Informant
Agency and Address Good Governs City Council
c/- Harpies Lawyer, 140 William Street Melbourne 3000
Phone: 9288 0555 Email: m.green@goodgoverns.com.au
Fax No: 9288 0666
Agency Ref: NYC:5197652
Signature of Registrar
Date
Filed at
Dat Date e
[KMS: 10158891_1]
FORM 2 Court
ref.
Continuation of Charges
Magistrates’ Court Criminal Procedure Rules 2009
Rule 11
(To be Filed at Court after Service)
Page No. 3
TO BE FILED AT COURT AFTER SERVICE
Person Charged James White, 42 Garden Road, Collingwood, VICTORIA, 3042
4 (Description of offence)
On 10 September 2010, at Collingwood, you failed to comply with a requirement imposed upon
you by the Food Standards Code in relation to the conduct of a food business contrary to
section 16(1) of the Food Act 1984.
PARTICULARS
You did not store food in such a way that it was protected from the likelihood of contamination
as required under section 6 of Division 3 of Food Standard 3.2.2.
State Act Other Specify
C’wealth Reg.
Act or Regulation No.
10082/1984
Section or Clause (Full Ref.)
16(1)
 Summary offence  Indictable offence
Request for committal
proceeding
 No  Yes
5 (Description of offence)
On 10 September 2010, at Collingwood, you sold food namely a loaf of bread that was unsafe
contrary to section 11(2) of the Food Act 1984.
PARTICULARS
A cigarette butt was found embedded in a loaf of bread.
State Act Other Specify
C’wealth Reg.
Act or Regulation No.
10082/1984
Section or Clause (Full Ref.)
11(2)
 Summary offence  Indictable offence
Request for committal
proceeding
 No  Yes
Are there any more
charges? No Yes – see page no. 4
Signature of Informant
Agency and Address Good Governs City Council
c/- Harpies Lawyer, 140 William Street Melbourne 3000
Phone: 9288 0555 Email: m.green@goodgoverns.com.au
Fax No: 9288 0666
Agency Ref: NYC:5197652
Signature of Registrar
Date
Filed at
Date Date
[KMS: 10158891_1]
FORM 2 Court
ref.
Continuation of Charges
Magistrates’ Court Criminal Procedure Rules 2009
Rule 11
(To be Filed at Court after Service)
Page No. 4
TO BE FILED AT COURT AFTER SERVICE
Person Charged James White, 42 Garden Road, Collingwood, VICTORIA, 3042
6 (Description of offence)
On 10 September 2010, at Collingwood, you failed to comply with a requirement imposed upon
you by the Food Standards Code in relation to the conduct of a food business contrary to
section 16(1) of the Food Act 1984.
PARTICULARS
You failed to develop a food safety program in accordance with clause 3 of Food Standard
3.2.1.
State Act Other Specify
C’wealth Reg.
Act or Regulation No.
10082/1984
Section or Clause (Full Ref.)
16(1)
 Summary offence  Indictable offence
Request for committal
proceeding
 No  Yes
(Description of offence)
***
***State ***Act ***Other Specify
***C’wealth ***Reg.
Act or Regulation No.
***
Section or Clause (Full Ref.)
***
 Summary offence  Indictable offence
Request for committal
proceeding
 No  Yes
Are there any more
charges? No Yes – see page no.
Signature of Informant
Agency and Address Good Governs City Council
c/- Harpies Lawyer, 140 William Street Melbourne 3000
Phone: 9288 0555 Email: m.green@goodgoverns.com.au
Fax No: 9288 0666
Agency Ref: NYC:5197652
Signature of Registrar
Date
Filed at
Date Date
[KMS: 10158891_1]
STATEMENT
My name is Susan/Samuel Baker and I live at 12 Smith Road, Collingwood.
On 10 September 2010 I drove my daughter, Mary Baker to the shopping centre at 42
Garden Road, Collingwood. I gave Mary a $5.00 note and asked her to buy a French bread
stick from the Sunny Hot Bread Bakery. Mary ran into the shopping centre and soon returned
with a French bread stick. Mary gave me $1.20 change.
When I got home I took the bread stick out of the plastic bag and placed it on a plate on my
kitchen bench. Later that day I sliced up the bread stick and put it into the microwave for one
minute and 20 seconds. I then spread liverwurst spread on several of the warmed slices of
bread.
I served the bread to my parents at my kitchen table. I took a bite of a slice of bread and as I
chewed the bread I noticed a cigarette taste in my mouth. As I chewed on the bread I
realised that there was something else was in my mouth apart from bread. I spat the
contents of my mouth into my hand and discovered a cigarette butt in the bread.
I placed the cigarette butt onto a plate on my kitchen bench and rang the health department
at the Good Governs City Council. I reported the incident to an environmental health officer,
Michelle/Michael Green, who collected the cigarette butt later that day.
…………………………….
Signed
Susan/Samuel Baker
9 March 2011
6
[KMS: 10158891_1]
STATEMENT
My name is Michelle/Michael Green and I am an environmental health officer employed by
Good Governs City Council. I am authorised under the Food Act 1984.
On 10 September 2010 I was contacted by Susan/Samual Baker who made a complaint
about a cigarette butt she had found in a French bread stick which she purchased from the
Sunny Hot Bread Bakery at the Shopping Centre at 42 Garden Road, Collingwood.
She told me she nearly vomited when she took a bite into a piece of bread and found a
cigarette butt in her mouth.
I collected the cigarette butt at about 6pm that afternoon. I placed the cigarette butt in a
plastic bag and placed it into my car dash-box.
On 28 September 2010 I took the cigarette butt into Dunn Sun and Rock, Analysts for
assessment.
On 3 October 2010 I inspected the Sunny Bread Bakery at the shopping centre at 42 Garden
Road, Collingwood. The name of the proprietor was not affixed to the food premises. I
entered the bakery and asked to speak to the manager. I was then greeted by James White
who said he was in charge of the business.
I asked James to allow me entry to inspect the back area of the bakery and he showed me
the food preparation processes employed at the bakery. On inspecting the rear of the
premises I observed the following:
 There was mould and built up grease and dirt on the food preparation benches and
walls.
 Raw chicken was stored in open buckets on the floor next to the pizza oven.
 a dough mixer was cracked and was chipped and rusty.
 There were spider webs in the corners of the ceiling and the roof timber had missing
slats where I could see into the roof cavity.
 There was no water connected to the hand basin in the food preparation area.
 The toilet cubicle was full of old boxes stacked to the ceiling and the toilet hand wash
area had no paper towels or soap.
 There were cockroaches behind the fridge.
Additionally, James was not able to produce a Food Safety Program or to identify the
Food Safety Supervisor at the premises. He said that the Food Safety Program was not
available because it was being updated at the time. He was unable to produce records of
complaints made by consumers or of temperature monitoring at the premises.
I also noticed a packet of cigarettes on a shelf above the dough mixing area. There were
many cigarette butts on the ground at the rear entrance to the bakery.
I told James that I needed to interview him formally and that he was to answer my
questions or I would prosecute him. The following exchange then took place.
Me: I need to interview you about my inspection and a complaint that council
has received. I must inform you that you are not obliged to say or do anything bu
anything you say or do may be given in evidence. Do you understand that?
7
[KMS: 10158891_1]
James Yes
Me: You are the boss at this shop and I have observed that it is unclean and
unhygienic. What do you have to say about that?
James: We are understaffed today and we had a special catering order yesterday –
the place is usually spotless but we have been under extra pressure, that’s
all.
Me: A cigarette butt was found in bread that was baked here. I saw a packet of
cigarettes out the back of the bakery. Why did you let food become
contaminated this way?
James: I don’t know what you are talking about. I don’t smoke.
Me: Okay, but there are cigarette butts on the ground at the back entrance to
the bakery. How do you explain that?
James: My staff have told me that there are several workers from other shops who
smoke out there. It has nothing to do with me.
Me: Okay, you should be aware that we might use this information against you if
the Council decides to take the matter further.
Interview concluded
I resolved to commence a prosecution against James.
……………………………………….
Signed
Michelle/Michael Green
8
[KMS: 10158891_1]
DS&R
Food Act 1984
Food (Forms and Registration) Regulations 2005
CERTIFICATE OF ANALYSIS
I, Andrew Davies the undersigned, of 52 – 58 Market Street, North Melbourne, Victoria,
certify that on 30 September 2010, I received from Michelle/Michael Green, EHO of Good
Governs City Council a sample unsealed and marked “Good Governs City Council – M
Green – 28/09/10 —- Cigarette Butt”, that I have analysed the sample and that the result
of my analysis is as follows:
Sample: food contaminated
The sample consisted of:
1. A cigarette butt found embedded in bread, submitted for examination in connection
with complaint ref: 0022345
2. The cigarette butt was embedded in white bread.
3. Analysis of the condition of the cigarette butt was consistent with the cigarette butt
having undergone a process of cooking or baking.
I am of the opinion that no change has taken place in the constitution of the sample
which would affect the proportion of any constituent set out above.
M GREEN
GOOD GOVERNS CITY COUNCIL Lab: Dunn Sun & Rock
Date issued: 1 October 2010
Reprinted: 2 October 2010


 

PLACE THIS ORDER OR A SIMILAR ORDER WITH LITE ESSAYS TODAY AND GET AN AMAZING DISCOUNT

The post Discuss the scenario with your group and determine who will play each of the following roles: appeared first on Cheapest Academic Custom Papers.

Welcome to originalessaywriters.com, our friendly and experienced essay writes are available 24/7 to answer all your questions. We offer high-quality academic essays written from scratch to guarantee top grades to all students. All our papers are 100% plagiarism-free and come with a plagiarism report, upon request

Find a tutor to help you with your papers!

PLACE YOUR ORDER