CRN 50365 L7 Final Building Law Principles Assessment Brief 2025-26 | UoSM

Assessment Information/Brief 2025-26

Assessment task details and instructions

Ms Dowd engages in the development of property and her portfolio continues to grow. 2025 has seen the continued development of her business but as always challenges arise! 

In the course of her business she has encountered the following issues as explained in each of the three scenarios presented below. You are required to address the issues and provide a reasoned response to each scenario which provides a framework of knowledge and advice where possible in order to attain the most beneficial resolution. In your response you should seek to address the following where applicable.

1. Identify relevant area(s) of tortious liability
2. Outline any relevant legal principles relating to those areas
3. Explain any potential liabilities that exist relevant to the parties involved
4. Discuss any possible defences that might be used to mitigate liabilities where evident
5. Discuss possible sanctions
6. Use relevant case-law and statute as required in support of arguments
7. Adopt a professional tone in your response
8. Make reasonable assumptions in the development of your response where required or possible.
9. Demonstrate effective research and apply both “in-text citations”, a full reference list, a bibliography, table of cases and table of statutes (in this order) at the END of the assessment (word count to follow at the end)

Scenario 1 

Whilst Ms Dowd has broad experience of dealing with contracts and the issues arising from them, she has less experience of matters relating to tortious liability. She has asked you to prepare a brief for her which outlines two key areas she is aware of which might prove problematic during forthcoming developments if not addressed appropriately. As such, she requires a review of matters relating to nuisance and trespass, how these might arise in her business activities in property development and possible outcomes. 

Prepare a review of these two key areas, referring to statute, case law and appropriate legal principles.
(30 marks)

Scenario 2 

Ms Dowd is considering pursuing the development of an existing residential property, a mid-terraced Victorian villa style house (as indicated in the photograph below). There are significant works required to the roof as well as the development of a currently unusable basement room into further living accommodation.

She is seeking advice as to how to undertake this work in accordance with the guidelines as set out in The Party Wall Act (1996). She is particularly interested in avoiding mistakes which others have made previously! 

Using both the appropriate statute and case law provide a response which will enable Ms Dowd to undertake her activities with minimum liability. (30 marks)

Scenario 3 

As her business has expanded so too has her delivery team. These include both employees and independent contractors. Outline the key factors that Ms Dowd needs to be aware of in relation to potential tortious liability when directing or commissioning work involving these parties.

Use appropriate case law to support your response.  (30 marks)

A further 10 marks are available for clarity of writing style, application of Harvard Referencing System, spelling, punctuation and grammar

TOTAL MARKS AVAILABLE 100 MARKS

Using Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI) tools

For this assessment you may use tools, software, or features of software which use artificial intelligence to generate content such as text, images or data, in an assistive and supportive capacity. This means you may use the tool to explore the topic, generate or process data, or suggest draft structures and refine the wording or your work. However, the final work you submit must be your own. Use of AI to generate content to misrepresent your own abilities or mislead your assessor is academic misconduct. When using AI tools, please use University provided tools within the requirements of the University's ICT Acceptable Use Policy, and do not upload sensitive or personal information. 

Word count/ duration (if applicable)

Your brief should be no longer than 2,500 words in length (+/- 10%).

On average each scenario (3 in total) will therefore consist of about 833 words. Any words in excess of the overall amount (2,500 words) will not be penalised but will not be considered for marking.

The title page, “In-text references” and the reference list / bibliography / table of cases / table of statutes are EXCLUDED from the word count. 

You must clearly state the word count used in your assessment at the end of the Reference List / Bibliography / Table of Cases / Table of Statutes.

How to submit

For coursework assessments only: students with a Reasonable Adjustment Plan (RAP) or Carer Support Plan should check your plan to see if an extension to this submission date has been agreed.

The assignment must be submitted electronically, as a single Word file, through Turnitin®. You are advised to submit a DRAFT copy prior to uploading your FINAL submission to check for similarity. Further information and support for students using Turnitin® can be found here: University of Salfod Manchester Blackboard Learn

As the University will mark assessments anonymously where possible, include your student roll number and not your name on your assessment. Do not upload links in the submission area, as we cannot access them and therefore cannot mark your work. If you have saved your files on your University of Salford OneDrive, dragging files to the submission area may attach a link instead of the file. Always attach files using the paperclip icon. 

Feedback

You can expect to receive feedback by 1600hrs Friday 16th January 2026. This will be in the form of individual feedback sheet added to the RUBRIC TAB in your Turn It In account. 

Assessment Criteria:

The assignment will be assessed strictly in accordance with the following criteria. Please ensure that you address each of these in relation to Scenarios 1 to 3 when writing your assignment. No marks will be awarded against any other criteria.

Assessment Criteria

Each question carries 30 marks, allocated as follows;

At  Level 7 the following marking scale shall be used:

• Outstanding 90% – 100% 
• Excellent 80% – 89%
• Very good 70% – 79%
• Good 60% – 69%
• Satisfactory 50% – 59%
• Unsatisfactory 40% & 49%
• Inadequate 30% – 39%
• Poor 20% & 29%
• Very poor 10% 19%
• Extremely poor 0% –   9%

Building Law Principles 2025/26 – Legal Liabilities - Grade Descriptors

90-100  OUTSTANDING

Outstanding clarity of writing style in the appropriate format (third person) and referencing written as an exemplary professional advisory brief. The organisation, structure and standard of presentation of the work, including punctuation, grammar, syntax and structure are outstanding throughout 

Outstanding development of coherent arguments underpinned by appropriate evidence/authority based on original use of case law and statute 

Outstanding depth of understanding of relevant most current legal concepts and ability to apply concepts to the given scenarios, accurate in all instances with excellent assumptions made enabling development of in-depth legal thought.

Outstanding capacity for original and critical thought, including professional and commercial awareness such as identifying mitigating circumstances/reliable defences across a range of tortious issues

80-89 EXCELLENT

Excellent clarity of writing style in the appropriate format (third person) and referencing written as an exemplary professional advisory brief. The organisation, structure and standard of presentation of the work, including punctuation, grammar, syntax and structure is excellent throughout.

Excellent development of coherent arguments underpinned by appropriate evidence/authority based on original use of case law and statute.

Excellent depth of understanding of relevant legal concepts and ability to apply concepts to the given scenarios, accurate in all instances with excellent assumptions made enabling development of in-depth legal thought.

Excellent capacity for original and critical thought, including professional and commercial awareness such as identifying mitigating circumstances/reliable defences across a range of tortious issues.

70-79 VERY GOOD

Very good clarity of writing style in the appropriate format (third person) and referencing written as a very good professional advisory brief. The organisation, structure and standard of presentation of the work, including punctuation, grammar, syntax and structure is very good throughout.

Very good development of coherent arguments underpinned by appropriate evidence/authority based on original use of case law and statute.

Very good depth of understanding of relevant legal concepts and ability to apply concepts to the given scenarios, accurate in most instances with very good assumptions made enabling development of appropriate legal thought.

Very good capacity for original and critical thought, including professional and commercial awareness such as identifying mitigating circumstances/reliable defences across a range of tortious issues.

60-69 GOOD

Good clarity of writing style in the appropriate format (third person) and referencing written as good professional advisory brief. The organisation, structure and standard of presentation of the work, including punctuation, grammar, syntax and structure is good throughout.

Good development of coherent arguments underpinned by appropriate evidence/authority based on original use of case law and statute.

Good depth of understanding of relevant legal concepts and ability to apply concepts to the given scenarios, accurate with good levels of consistency with good assumptions made enabling development of appropriate legal thought.

Good capacity for original and critical thought, including professional and commercial awareness such as identifying mitigating circumstances/reliable defences across a range of tortious issues.

50-59 Satisfactory

Satisfactory clarity of writing style in the appropriate format (third person) and referencing written as a satisfactory legal advisory brief. The organisation, structure and standard of presentation of the work, including punctuation, grammar, syntax and structure is satisfactory throughout.

Satisfactory development of coherent arguments underpinned by appropriate evidence/authority based on original use of case law and statute.

Satisfactory depth of understanding of relevant legal concepts and ability to apply concepts to the given scenarios, accurate in some instances with fair assumptions made enabling development of some  legal thought.

Satisfactory capacity for original and critical thought, including professional and commercial awareness such as identifying mitigating circumstances/reliable defences across a range of tortious issues.

40-49 Unsatisfactory

Unsatisfactory clarity of writing style in the appropriate format (third person) and referencing written as advisory brief. The organisation, structure and standard of presentation of the work, including punctuation, grammar, syntax and structure is unsatisfactory throughout 

Unsatisfactory development of arguments with lack of appropriate evidence/authority based on use of case law and statute 

Unsatisfactory depth of understanding of relevant legal concepts and ability to apply concepts to the given scenarios, with inaccuracies accurate in some instances with minimal relevant assumptions made and lack of development of legal thought.

Unsatisfactory capacity for original and critical thought, lack of professional and commercial awareness such as identifying some mitigating circumstances/reliable defences relating to tortious issues

30-39 UNSATISFACTORY

Unsatisfactory clarity of writing style and referencing with little evidence of a professional advisory brief. The organisation, structure and standard of presentation of the work, including punctuation, grammar, syntax and structure are unsatisfactory throughout 
Unsatisfactory development of arguments lacking appropriate evidence/authority relating to use of case law and statute 

Unsatisfactory depth of understanding of relevant legal concepts and which fails to apply legal concepts to the given scenarios, mostly inaccurate, few assumptions made with minimal evidence appropriate of legal thought.

Unsatisfactory capacity for original and critical thought, minimal professional and commercial awareness relating to the identification of mitigating circumstances/reliable defences across  tortious issues

20-29 POOR

Poor clarity of writing style, inappropriate format utilised, lacking coherent referencing. The organisation, structure and standard of presentation of the work, including punctuation, grammar, syntax and structure are poor throughout 
Poor development of coherent arguments with weak, inaccurate evidence/authority with reference to use of case law and statute 

Poor depth of understanding of relevant legal concepts and ability to apply concepts to the given scenarios, with misleading assumptions which fail to develop appropriate legal thought.

Poor capacity for original and critical thought, minimal professional and commercial awareness such as identifying mitigating circumstances/reliable defences across a range of tortious issues

10-19 VERY POOR

Very poor clarity of writing style and presentation of information. The organisation, structure and standard of presentation of the work, including punctuation, grammar, syntax and structure are very poor throughout 
Very poor development of coherent arguments, little or no appropriate evidence/authority based on original use of case law and statute 
Very poor depth of understanding of relevant legal concepts and minimal application of concepts to the given scenarios, no assumptions and lack of any in-depth legal thought.
Very poor capacity for original and critical thought, including no professional and commercial awareness such as identifying mitigating circumstances/reliable defences across a range of tortious issues

0-9 EXTREMELY POOR

Extremely poor clarity of writing style, inappropriate format and referencing . The organisation, structure and standard of presentation of the work, including punctuation, grammar, syntax and structure are extremely poor throughout 
Extremely poor development of coherent arguments. No use of appropriate evidence/authority based on original use of case law and statute 

Extremely poor depth of understanding of relevant legal concepts, no application of concepts evident, no assumptions or subsequent development of any legal thought.

Extremely poor capacity for original and critical thought, no professional and commercial awareness such as identifying mitigating circumstances/reliable defences across a range of tortious issues

Request Answer of this Assignment