file a suit against Bobette

Need help with my writing homework on Government of South Australia. Write a 2000 word paper answering; In this particular case, the damage caused to Thad is attributable to an act of commission by Mick, and which was diametrically opposite to the given set of instructions by the former. Thad just needed a quote for the earthmoving job, and he never made any mention whatsoever of immediately carrying out the job (earthmoving). The fact that Mick acted in conformity with the instructions of Thad, and that it was Bobette who misinterpreted the communication from Mick, is not of any concern to Thad.

Secondly, Thad is also empowered to file a suit against Bobette, by invoking the provisions of “trespass”, as elaborated by the Summary Offences Act 1953. This Law describes “trespass” as any act by a person, in entering on to the land of another person, without any valid authorization or invitation. As per this Act, the aggrieved party is enabled to carry out legal proceedings against the trespasser, to recover compensation for any damage caused by them (trespasser). (2)

In the case, Thad had to face a rather huge loss, on account of the unauthorized earthmoving operation of Bobette, as he lost the highly lucrative offer from Australian Conservation Council. As mentioned earlier, the communication gap between Mick and Bobette can in no way be used to prevent Thad from claiming damages, as throughout the course of all the events related to the case, he (Thad) was always specific in his communications with Mick.

2) In this particular case, Bobcat has very limited options for seeking relief through legal recourse, as well as for claiming the amount of its account. As a matter of fact, this aspect of the case involving Bobette and Mick signifies the most intricate facet of the case. Both of them acted in utmost good faith and the communication gap is attributable solely to the circumstances prevailing during the first telephonic talk between Mick and Bobette.