Presentation Assessment You are the director of the legal team for CR Glazing Limited, a business which manufactures and installs energy efficient double glazed doors and windows throughout the UK. You have recently received

Module name

Commercial Law

Module code

UJUUMF-30-2

Assessment name

Presentation (recorded)

Assessment task reference

2

Module intended learning outcomes being assessed

Module Learning Outcome 1: Understand and apply primary and secondary legal sources of commercial law.   

Module Learning Outcome 2: Identify and critically analyse the legal concepts pertaining to the topics studied.   

Module Learning Outcome 4: Communicate law and legal advice clearly and succinctly through a time limited verbal presentation.  

Assessment deadline

14:00 on Wednesday 29 April 2026

48-hour late submission window applies?

Yes – for more details, please see https://www.uwe.ac.uk/study/academic-information/personal-circumstances/late-submission-window   

Marks and feedback to be returned by

14.00 on Tuesday 2 June 2026

Assessment weighting

40%

Content limit, if applicable

The maximum amount of time allowed for the recorded presentation is 10 minutes. 

Acceptable file formats

You must use Panopto to record your presentation; please see the Panopto Student Submissions guidance.  

Slides should be in PowerPoint (ppt. or .pptx)

The Bibliography should be in Word (.doc or .docx).

It is your responsibility to ensure that your work is accessible; other formats of submission may therefore not be accepted/marked if the marker cannot access the file(s).

NOTE: Failure to make the recording accessible or lack of a video feed would result in students not meeting the requirements of the assessment and therefore fail the assessment.

Please contact the IT Help Desk if you experience any technical issues when recording, and/or uploading your files. Please do not contact academic staff, as they will be unable to help you with this matter.

Formatting requirements

You must record yourself (using a webcam) and your slides. This means that

• you must record yourself using a webcam
  and
• you must be physically visible in the recording.

All written work submitted should be in line with the Acceptable file formats outlined above.  

Referencing requirements

• OSCOLA for single-honours (LLB) students
• Either OSCOLA or UWE Harvard for joint awards students (please confirm which used)

Specific resources which may help you complete this assessment

The lectures and workshops taught over Semester 2 of the Commercial Law module

Good Scholarship Requirements

When submitting your work, you will be required to confirm that the work is your own (or that of your group, if assessed as group work), and that it has been submitted following the principles of academic integrity.

This also includes following the guidance on the use of generative AI. Good practice requires that you understand what you use it for and that you acknowledge its use appropriately in your references.  Guidance on the referencing of generative AI-produced material/ideas can be found here.

Good scholarship also requires that you do not commit an assessment offence. Common assessment offences on this module include:

• Plagiarism
• Collusion

There is extensive advice on how to prepare for assessments and to avoid offences on UWE’s Study Skills Preparing for Assessments.

Presentation Assessment

You are the director of the legal team for CR Glazing Limited, a business which manufactures and installs energy efficient double glazed doors and windows throughout the UK. You have recently received an email from Siddique Hassan, the Sales Director, about two issues he needs your advice on. 

I have two issues which I need some legal advice on please.

• Firstly, I’ve just been told that Jake Wetherall (one of our directors) has just purchased on behalf of the Company a new piece of window manufacturing machinery to make new double-glazed UPVC plastic windows. He bought the machinery from WindowTech Limited, telling them that he was our Purchasing Director. As you know, Jake isn’t our Purchasing Director and has no authority to enter into a contract to buy this machinery on behalf of our company without prior approval from the Board of Directors.

When I looked into this further, it turns out that Jake has actually acted on an informal basis as Purchasing Director for our company on a few previous occasions over the last year when the Board has specifically authorised him to do so. On one of these occasions Jake, acting for us, purchased a different piece of machinery from WindowTech Limited.

Unfortunately Jake’s agreed to pay too much for the machinery from WindowTech Limited (£15,000), we can get it cheaper elsewhere (£12,500). So I’d like to find out if we are bound to honour the contract that Jake’s signed on behalf of the company to buy this machinery?

• Secondly, we recently placed an order for 50 triple glazed glass units from Crystal Glazing Limited, a new supplier, who offered a very competitive price. As you know, we don’t yet have the capability to manufacture our own triple glazed windows so we buy them in when needed. The triple glazed units were delivered on time and in the right quantity, but soon after unpacking it became evident that all the triple glazed units were cracked and would not be fit for sale to our customers. Can we return these items and get a refund?

Kind regards,

You are asked to present your analysis of the case to the rest of the Board via a recorded presentation, which is to be submitted on 2 May 2026. In your presentation you should:

• Provide an overview of the facts of the case.
• With reference to relevant legal authority, explain (with reasons):
  • whether WindowTech Ltd can force our company, CR Glazing Ltd to honour the contract made by Jake Wetherall; and
  • whether CR Glazing Limited has any cause of action against Crystal Glazing Limited in relation to the cracked triple glazed windows.
  • You should identify clearly the parties to the dispute in each of the above issues and indicate prospects of success in any legal action.
  • Draw your presentation together with a conclusion/ next steps.

The Oral Assessment requires that you submit three pieces of work:

• Self-recorded oral presentation that shows you and your slides; and
• Powerpoint slides used in that presentation; and
• A bibliography must also be submitted.
• Please see the Submitting Assignments guidance. NOTE that you will need to ensure that all three files (the recording, the PowerPoint slides and the Bibliography) are attached to the one submission you are making. Do not submit your files in separate submissions, as only the latest submission will be marked. 

Self-recorded Presentation

• You may use notes to help you throughout your presentation. However, you should not read from a pre-prepared script, nor should you simply read from your slides – doing so will affect your mark.

PowerPoint Slides

• Your first slide must contain your full name, student number and module name in Arial 48 point.

Bibliography

• Your bibliography MUST be submitted in the form of a Word document and must provide details of all sources used in preparing for the oral assessment.
• The Bibliography MUST be in OSCOLA/Harvard (if JA student) format.

What am I required to do on this assessment?

Prepare a recording of you giving a presentation. The scenario on which the presentation must be based is set out below under ‘Further Information’ of this document under the heading ‘Presentation Assessment – Question’. Make sure you address/answer each of the bullet points set out in the question. You must also prepare a written bibliography and PowerPoint slides that you will use in your presentation.

When you have prepared your presentation, record your presentation (max 10 minutes) using Panopto and upload it to Panopto when you are ready to submit it for marking.  Please make sure you also upload the written bibliography and the PowerPoint slides you use in your recorded presentation.

Where should I start?

Attend all lectures and workshops in Semester 2. If you miss any, carry out the work set out in each set of workshop student instructions and watch each lecture recording to ensure you understand the topics which will be assessed by this presentation assessment. Use the Commercial Law textbook (see the Reading List on the module blackboard site) to add detail and to help you to give the correct advice.  

What do I need to do to pass?

The marking criteria is set out below.

What milestones are there for this module, and when might I aim to reach these?

Read the assessment question in this Assessment Brief, then start to research the relevant law. Plan your answer to the client and write PowerPoint slides to accompany your presentation. Write a bibliography showing the sources you have used in your research. Practice your presentation before recording it.

Refer to UWE’s Assignment Planner for additional guidance and support.

(How) May I use generative AI?

You do not need to use generative AI to complete this assessment.  If you do engage with generative AI, do so in the same way you handle other sources of information. Give credit where credit is due. Any use of AI must be credited.

The manner in which it is credited remains the same as for any legal source. Cite any text borrowing, cite any paraphrasing this means putting generative AI-produced text in inverted commas (“ “). Credit is only given for your own intellectual input in the work. This means that if you use generative AI, you must engage with the AI tool’s output. Like any research tool, fact-check and cross-reference. Otherwise, the result will be something that, on its face, looks confident and robust, maybe even authoritative, but lacks, on further inspection, depth and accuracy. You can find more guidance on ‘how to’ on Using generative AI at UWE Bristol

Practise good academic integrity. For law students, higher levels of transparency, honesty and originality are expected. It is important to note that you should not present AI output as your own opinion or critical analysis.

What resources will help me understand and succeed with what I’ve been asked to do?

• Finding books, articles and other information > generally, here and for legal research, here
• Plan and structure your work > workbook here
• Write a report > workbook here
• Be reflective > workbook here
• Be critical/evaluative > workbook here
• Reference via OSCOLA, or Harvard (optional for joint award students only) – or see BLIS course

Please refer to the Assessment Q&A on the module’s Blackboard site for more guidance.  This Q&A allows you to ask questions about the assessment(s), anonymously if you wish, and receive a response from the module leader. 

You can and should subscribe to the Q&A in order that you are emailed when a question is posed and an answer provided.  Please note:  The answers posted here effectively form part of the assessment brief - that is, if you do something instructed or advised against in this Q&A, you will lose marks, and, conversely, if you follow the guidance provided, you will earn marks. 

Please observe the following before posting:

1. Do not ask a question that has already been asked;
2. Do not ask a question that can readily be answered using the resources on Blackboard, including any module handbook;
3. Please only post relevant and sensible questions, all of which are moderated before becoming public;

Please ensure your question is clear and precise, and include any contextual information necessary for the module leader to understand it.

FOR WORK UPLOADED TO BLACKBOARD, IT IS ESSENTIAL THAT YOU PREVIEW YOUR WORK IN BLACKBOARD BEFORE FINAL SUBMISSION. 

You may be able to ask for an alternative form of assessment.  Please see these webpages and speak to the Module Leader if in doubt.

Criterion

Failed attempt qualities

(0 – 39%)

Satisfactory attempt qualities

(40 – 49%)

Sound attempt qualities

(50 – 59%)

Good attempt

qualities

(60 – 69%)

Excellent attempt qualities

(70 – 84%)

Outstanding attempt qualities

(85%+)

Module Learning Outcome 1: Understand and apply primary and secondary legal sources of commercial law.   

Little to no relevance to research focus / questions.

No clear structure. Much repetition.   

No synthesis of sources’ findings.  

No criticality.  

Some relevant research on focus / questions, but some errors in law.  

Some repetition.  Clunky structure.

Minimal evidence of synthesis of findings between sources.

Almost all research clearly relevant to research focus/ questions, but some implicitly so;

Evidence of structure, but significant issues remain;

Some variation in degree of depth of analysis /discussion of questions;

Some advice provided but law not applied to the facts well.

All research clearly relevant to research focus / questions, but some implicitly so;

Clear structure/flow with minor errors;

Minimal variation in depth of analysis/ discussion between sections;

Clear, explicit articulation of relationships between the law and the facts;

Relevance to questions explicitly argued;

Clear, logical, ‘flowing’ structure throughout;

Consistent depth of analysis/ discussion between sections;

Some evidence of criticality;

Comprehensive, consistent, cogent and entirely persuasive identification of the law and application of the law to the facts;

Extensive criticality;

Module Learning Outcome 2: Identify and critically analyse the legal concepts pertaining to the topics studied.   

Fails to demonstrate a basic understanding of legal principles or systems.

Little or inaccurate evaluation of legal information.

Demonstrates a basic understanding of legal principles or systems.

Some evaluation of legal information.

Recognise and acknowledge knowledge gaps with some engaged enquiry.

Some legal analytical skills exhibited but does not often apply appropriate legal discussion.

An awareness of knowledge gaps and moderate effort to address these through independent enquiry.

A clear understanding of legal principles and systems.

Analysis is generally accurate but may lack depth or be somewhat descriptive rather than critical.

A clear identification of knowledge gaps and an active effort to address these independently.

A thorough and accurate analysis of legal principles and systems, with some critical engagement and insightful commentary.

Independent enquiry, demonstrating solid critical analysis and evaluation of legal information is well-reasoned and insightful.

Substantially engages in independent enquiry to bridge gaps.

Excellent with legal principles and critical insightful commentary.

Excellent in conducting independent enquiry, showing advanced critical thinking and analytical skills.

Evaluation of legal information is comprehensive, demonstrating a deep and thorough understanding

Module Learning Outcome 4: Communicate law and legal advice clearly and succinctly through a time limited verbal presentation.  

Much incomprehensible.

Significant use of colloquialisms/ slang/ other inappropriate information.

Extremely rushed or verbose.

Little to no structure.

Arguments illogical and/or lacking underpinning.

Generally, imprecise and much irrelevant.

Communication is somewhat comprehensible.  

Moderate use of colloquialisms/ slang.  

Lacks engagement.  Pace of communication consistently rushed / verbose.

Minimal evidence of structure.

One or two arguments cogent.

Some precision/ relevance.

Little evidence style is tailored to and appropriate for the non-legally trained audience;

Most of the information is inappropriate.

Communication generally comprehensible;

Some use of colloquialisms/ slang;

Singular style used, hindering engagement;

Pace generally rushed/ verbose;

Some evidence of structure;

Some arguments cogent;

Around half precise/ relevant;

Some evidence style is tailored to and appropriate for audience;

Almost all comprehensible;

Minimal use of colloquialisms/ slang;

Some evidence of variation in style which enhances engagement;

Pace of communication somewhat rushed/ verbose;

Discrete points/ideas sometimes segregated;

Clear evidence of structuring;

Most arguments cogent;

Generally precise, and relevant;

Clear evidence of tailoring to and appropriate for audience.  Little is inappropriate;

All comprehensible;

No use of colloquialisms/ slang;

Almost all engaging;

Pace of a little rushed/ verbose;

Discrete points/ideas usually segregated;

Structuring is generally logical;

Almost all arguments cogent, precise, and relevant;

Almost all tailored to and appropriate for audience; nothing is inappropriate;

Entirely engaging;

Pace ideal;

Discrete points/ideas always segregated;

Structuring logical throughout;

All arguments cogent, precise, and relevant;

All information tailored to and appropriate for audience;

Qualities for sound, good, excellent and outstanding classifications include all lower classification-qualities, except where there are inconsistencies in which case the higher classification description replaces the lower classification description for that criterion.

The marking criteria above are intended to give guidance on the major considerations taken into account for each criterion.  It is not comprehensive nor authoritative, and markers will assess against academic ‘norms’ and using their academic judgement.  Achievement of a classification’s component does not automatically result in achievement of that classification, nor does failure to meet one or more component.

Note that unless specifically indicated otherwise in the assessment brief, your overall mark is not a simple arithmetical result of the classification selections made above.  Particularly mark-worthy material will be generously rewarded and particularly problematic material (e.g.  poor academic practice in relation to referencing; English which is incomprehensible) may incur a sig