+1 (208) 254-6996 [email protected]

Hello, I am looking for you to consider EU law an assignment with 1,500 word count with a strong grade 2:1 is this entitled to your strong point as I’m very welcome for you to do my work as I’m sure you can promise me that high 1st. I hope hear from you soon

Plagiarism Free 
high 1st I am looking at please
Quality written
free movement of goods
Involve cases and describe what topic you’re talking on the specific cases 
I will send more information on free movements of goods if needed

Don't use plagiarized sources. Get Your Custom Essay on
I Will Send More Information On Free Movements Of Goods If Needed
Just from $13/Page
Order Essay

LLB Coursework Assessments

Level 5


Assignment Question 3

How to Submit. 4

1.1. Presentation 4

1.2. Referencing 4

1.3. Work Limit 4

1.4. Late Submission 5

1.5. Extensions 5

1.6. Serious Adverse Circumstances 6

Results and Feedback 6

Academic Offences. Cheating, Plagiarism & Collusion 8

Grading Criteria 9

OSCOLA Quick Reference Guide 1 2

Extension Request Form…………………………………………………………………………….14

Information about the assignment:

CourseworkQuestion Posted on StudyNetSubmission DateCoursework Return Date (4 weeks)
EU CW26/10/201807/12/2018


Word Limit: 1,500 words excluding footnotes and bibliography.

Bill is an Italian manufacturer of a leather manufacturing machine called Bellissimo Pelle (BP). He has supplied to manufacturers in both Italy and Malta for twenty years. Bill now plans to sell his BP in Spain, Germany and France.

a) Bill has since learned that Spanish legislation requires a licence to import BP. Spain has placed an annual limit on the quantity of leather manufacturing machines that may be imported and they will only give 6,000 licences in a year.

b) Germany has Health and Safety legislation in place which requires the BP to be fitted with an external filtration system to collect leather smell. This legislation has only recently been introduced following a research article linking leather smell with breathing problems and asthma. The research suggests that the external filtration system reduces the risk by 80%.

Most of the leather manufacturing machines manufactured in Germany already have the filtration system. Bill’s machines do not comply but do have an internal filtration system which, in Bill’s opinion, is much more efficient than the external ones required by the German legislation.

c) Finally, the French government said that BP can only be sold in outlets that have licences from the government.

Advise Bill as to the application of EU law on the free movement of goods to this situation.

How to submit:

Written Coursework:

Ensure that you consult your individual module guides for details on individual assessments.


The assignment itself should be in Arial font size 11 and in double line spacing to allow for the markers’ comments.

Your name must not appear on your assignment. All assessed coursework is marked anonymously using your student registration number on your ID card. Your student registration number and module name should appear on every page of your essay and each page should be numbered. This is best achieved by use of the header and footer tool. You are also required to put your student registration number and module title in the file name of your assignment when submitting on StudyNet (e.g. Crime and Deviance 14043489.doc).

Word Length[footnoteRef:1] [1: Students should note that in Microsoft Word, if the reference mark (footnote number) is inside the punctuation mark, then the punctuation gets counted as a new work. If the reference mark is outside the punctuation mark, then it will not be counted. E.g. He said 1. = 3 words; He said 1, = 3 words; He said. 1 = 2 words; He said, 1 = 2 words.]

Your word count must appear at the end of your work.

Word limits will be strictly applied as you are being assessed on your ability to produce an answer within a proscribed format. Do not exceed the word limit in relation to your answer. Students who exceed the word count by one word will be capped at 40%.

The word count for coursework will NOT include footnotes or the bibliography. However, footnotes must not include material that should be in the body of the answer or be used as a means to circumvent the word count.

Late Submission of Coursework

Submission deadlines are not flexible. Students should submit their work well in advance of the deadline (ideally several hours) to be sure of a reliable internet connection and sufficient upload time. Work submitted at any point (including seconds) after the deadline is recorded as a late submission and will be capped.

All students must note that failure to submit coursework by the dates and time specified has SERIOUS CONSEQUENCES. The penalties for late submission of coursework are:

a. Coursework (including deferred coursework, but with the exception of referred coursework) relating to modules at Levels 0, 4, 5 and 6, submitted up to one (1) week after the published deadline will receive a maximum numeric grade of 40.

b. Coursework (including deferred coursework, but with the exception of referred coursework) relating to modules at Level 7 submitted up to one (1) week after the published deadline will receive a maximum numeric grade of 50.

c. Referred coursework submitted after the published deadline will be awarded a grade of zero (0). (Unless there is an agreed extension to the deadline or there are Serious Adverse Circumstances)

d. Coursework (including deferred coursework) submitted later than one (1) week after the published deadline will be awarded a grade of zero (0). (Unless there is an agreed extension to the deadline or there are Serious Adverse Circumstances)


All quotations from, or use of other writers’ work must be properly referenced- that is, you must give the author, title, and date of publication of the work concerned, and the page or section number of the passage quoted or cited. Reference style should remain consistent throughout each submitted essay.

Your coursework answer should be properly referenced using the Oxford Referencing System (OSCOLA) see www.law.ox.ac.uk

You should include a full bibliography at the end of your work.


All modules within the School will offer students the opportunity to use Turnitin formatively. Formative submission will be limited to one attempt per assignment in line with the University policy which seeks to support the development of students’ academic writing skills and to promote good academic practice. Students will be able to make use of of Turnitin for the larger assessments worth 50% or more. These are mainly positioned within Semester B. All final year dissertations/individual projects should be run through Turnitin. These are all submitted in Semester B/C.

Students will use Turnitin from the options below according to the level of study and specific module requirements:

· Summative essays worth at least 50% of the module mark;

· Specific pieces of coursework which require submission of a Turnitin report as designated by the Programme Leader;

· Turnitin may be used on individual pieces of work in which plagiarism is suspected, taking account of the level of study, the level of writing maturity expected of the student and the nature of the assignment task.

What happens when I submit an assessment?

· All work is marked anonymously.

· All work is marked against grading criteria, which is detailed in this document.

· Each element of assessment has a marking scheme attached to it to ensure that teams which have more than one marker are marking against objectively determined principles.

· Once marked, a sample of the assignments will be moderated by at least one other tutor to ensure that there is consistency in both the mark and the feedback given.

· You will receive interim feedback 3 weeks after the submission deadline.

· In some cases (such as a dissertation), work is double-blind marked meaning that assignments are marked independently by two markers and a final mark is agreed.

· Your marked assignment and mark will be returned within four calendar weeks. If there is a delay to this (for example due to marker illness), you will be notified in advance by the Associate Dean (Academic Quality Assurance).

· All marks are provisional and await confirmation by the relevant Board of Examiners.

If you have any queries about your marked work following its return, please arrange an appointment to speak with the marker in the first instance.

Students’ coursework will be returned to them together with feedback through StudyNet in a timely manner, no later than four (4) calendar weeks after the submission deadline. Any exceptions to this must be agreed by the Associate Dean of School (Academic Quality Assurance) and notified to students in advance of the expiration of the four (4) week period. For work of an on-going nature, such as a major project or dissertation, supervising staff will ensure that students are provided with feedback at interim stages.

1. Academic Offences

Specific detail relating to academic offences is located in UPR AS13 & AS14. Assessment (by examination or coursework) can be stressful, but is part of everyday life for students and most people manage it well. There are a small number who seek to gain an unfair advantage over their fellow students by acts of academic misconduct. Academic misconduct comes in various forms but the most common are plagiarism (i.e. presenting another person’s work as your own), falsification of data, collusion and cheating. The University takes a very dim view of such activity and the penalties can be severe. The best advice is not to do it in the first place. If you are finding a module difficult then speak to one of the teaching staff.

a. Cheating

To attempt to gain an unfair, improper or dishonest advantage in the assessment process; to gain an unfair, improper or dishonest advantage in the assessment process; where on the balance of probability it could reasonably be construed that a candidate intended to gain an unfair, improper or dishonest advantage in the assessment process. Cheating includes:

a) Impersonation – either where a student allows any other person to take an assessment on their behalf or to present themselves as being that student or where a current University of Hertfordshire student takes an assessment on behalf of another University of Hertfordshire student;

b) Obtaining or attempting to obtain unauthorised access to examination papers;

c) The copying of, or attempting to copy, the work of another candidate in the examination or other in class assessment, whether by overlooking what he or she has written or is writing or by asking him or her for information in whatever form;

d) The introduction into an examination room (or any other room in which a formal assessment is taking place) of aids including books, notes, personal notes or revision notes in any form, papers, stationery, computer disks or other devices of any kind other than those permitted in the rubric of the examination paper. This includes, for example, unauthorised information stored in the memory of a pocket calculator, in a mobile telephone, personal organiser or any other device;

e) Requesting a temporary absence from an examination room (or any other room in which a formal assessment is taking place) with the intention of gaining, or attempting to gain, access to information that may be relevant to a formal assessment;

f) False statements made in order to receive special considerations by the Board of Examiners or to obtain extensions to deadlines or exemption from work;

g) Assisting or attempting to assist another University of Hertfordshire student to gain or attempt to gain an unfair, improper, or dishonest advantage in the assessment process;

h) The purchase or theft of material submitted for assessment;

i) Academic misconduct offences as defined by section 2.1.4, a – f, where on a balance of probability, it could reasonably be construed that a candidate attempted or intended to gain an unfair, improper or dishonest advantage in the assessment process.

b. Plagiarism:

The misappropriation or use of others’ ideas, intellectual property or work (written or otherwise), without acknowledgement or permission. This may include, but is not limited to:

a) The importing of phrases from or all or part of another person’s work without using quotation marks and identifying the source;

b) Without acknowledgement of the source, making extensive use of another person’s work, either by summarising or paraphrasing the work merely by changing a few words or by altering the order in which the material is presented;

c) The use of the ideas of another person without acknowledgement of the source or the presentation of work which substantially comprises the ideas of another person and which represents these as being the ideas of the candidate. (For the avoidance of doubt, plagiarism may be intentional or unintentional)

c. Collusion:

Evidence of the representation by an individual of work which he or she has undertaken jointly with another person as having been undertaken independently of that person.

2. Grading Criteria

The following tables are provided by the University to assist in the interpretation of numeric grades given for assessments:

Levels 0, 4, 5, 6 (Undergraduate Level)Level 7 (Masters Level)
Numeric Grade awardedInterpretation of GradeNumeric Grade awardedInterpretation of Grade
Grade DescriptorEquivalent Classification DescriptorGrade DescriptorEquivalent Classification Descriptor
80-100Outstanding1st Class Honours/ Distinction80-100Outstanding1st Class Honours/ Distinction
60-69Very goodUpper 2nd Class Honours/ Commendation60-69Very goodUpper 2nd Class Honours/ Commendation
50-59GoodLower 2nd Class Honours/Pass50-59Good/ satisfactoryLower 2nd Class Honours/Pass
50Referred Pass
40-49Satisfactory3rd Class Honours/Pass40-49Marginal failNot applicable
40Referred Pass
30-39Clear fail
30-39Marginal failNot applicable
20-29Clear fail20-29
0-19Little or nothing of merit0-19Little or nothing of merit

LLB Programme Handbook

More guidance on the School Assessment policies is available in the LLB Programme Handbook which is available on StudyNet.

Expectations of written assessment at Level 5

Presentation & structureIncludes:Content / KnowledgeIncludes:Breadth / Depth & Integration of SourcesIncludes:Analysis & Applicationincludes:Presentation of ReferencesIncludes:
Structure work to present a coherent point of view from both sides of the argument if requiredUse the introduction to set out these ideasBegin to use more academic and legal languageIdentify the legal or other relevant issues raised by the questionState the law or other sources accurately and in appropriate detailProvide a reasoned and supported conclusionDemonstrate use of texts and leading case law or other sourcesConsider both sides of an argument with supporting material from law or other sourcesIntegrate this supporting material concisely into your argumentAnalysis:Use your material to demonstrate your understanding of the issuesAttempt to include a balance of contrasting arguments to support your analysis from your sourcesApplication:Make good use of supporting sources to develop your applicationUse a range of footnotes to cite your referencesThis can be used to evidence your wider reading and researchInclude all references in your bibliographyUse the OSCOLA referencing system – information available on Studynet under Learning Resources and the Law Subject Toolkit
Key tips:Continue to make good use of paragraphs to logically order your discussionCheck your grammar for clarity of expressionUse the spell checker and double check unusual words such as case namesEnsure your spell checker is set to English UKMake more substantial use of footnotes than at level 4Key tips:Aim for a balance of appropriate detail highlighting the key issues from your sources depending on the significance of the issue to the answerAvoid description, balance your argument with analysis and applicationAvoid including irrelevant material to the question setKey tips:For a higher mark you will need to show evidence of reading beyond the basic texts and leading cases.Look for relevant journal articles or case notes to enhance your answerKey tips:Review the instruction in the Q – words such as ‘Analyse’, ‘Argue’, ‘Examine’ elate to Analysis whilst words such as ‘Apply’ ‘Demonstrate’, ‘Illustrate’ relate to ApplicationKeep the instructions in mind whilst preparing your answerIn a problem question scenario you should analyse the issues from both sides of the competing arguments and then in your application identify the position of the party you are asked to advise providing any difficulties to their position in your conclusionKey tip:Avoid plagiarismEnsure you use quotation marks where relevant and reference the quotation

If this is an individual piece of assessed work, ensure you avoid collusion when preparing and writing your answer

Detailed criteria on mark ranges below:

Written Work Assessment and Grading Criteria: Level 5

Numeric GradeGrade DescriptorWritten Work Level 5 Grading Criteria
Presentation & structureContent / KnowledgeBreadth / Depth & Integration of SourcesAnalysis & ApplicationPresentation of References
80-100OutstandingworkOutstanding presentation & clarity.No significant grammatical / spelling errors.Outstanding exploration of topic showing excellent knowledge & understanding.Outstanding breadth & depth of sources used. Outstanding integration of sources into work.Outstanding level of analysis & application.Highly developed / focused work.Outstanding standard of referencing within text with accuracy to those on list.Accurate list & use of recommended referencing system.
70-79Excellent workExcellent structure.Fluent writing style with very few errors.Excellent level of knowledge & demonstrated. Covers all relevant points & issues.Excellent breadth & depth.Excellent integration of sources into work.Excellent level of analysis & application of issues.Excellent standard of referencing within text with accuracy to those on list.Accurate list & use of recommended referencing system.
60-69Very good workVery good clear structure.Articulate & fluent writing style. Very few grammatical errors & spelling mistakes.Very good level of knowledge & understanding demonstrated. Some minor issues not fully explored or appliedVery good breadth & depth appropriate to topic.Sources integrated very well.Very good level of, analysis & application but not consistently taken to full extent.Very good standard of referencing within text with general accuracy to those on list.Use of recommended referencing system.
50-59Good workGood clear presentation & structure with paragraphing.Writing is mainly clear but some spelling &/ or grammatical errors.Good level of knowledge & understanding demonstrated. Most major issues explored with some minor aspects not consideredGood breadth & depth appropriate to topic.Sources integrated well.Good level of analysis & application but some issues could be addressed or developed further.Some minor omissions.Good standard of referencing within text with most accurate to those on list.Use of recommended referencing system.
40-49Satisfactory workSatisfactory but basic structure.Not always written clearly & has grammatical & / or spelling errors.Satisfactory level of knowledge & understanding but with limited integration into topic set. Some major issues not fully explored and minor issues omitted.Satisfactory breadth & depth appropriate to topic.Sources integrated in some places.Satisfactory level of analysis & application but some matters superficially addressed or omittedBasic referencing within text & consistent use of referencing system.Some inaccuracies in recording.
30-39Marginal FailWeak format, limited or poor structure.Muddled work with many spelling & / or grammatical errors.Unsatisfactory evidence of knowledge & understanding with limited exploration or omission of the major issuesLimited or muddled understanding of the topic with limited reference to relevant sources with some irrelevant to topic.Limited evidence of analysis & application.More development & comment needed. Answer generally limited to accurate description.Use of referencing system with errors & inconsistently applied. Limited referencing within the text. Limited accuracy of in-text references compared to those in the final Reference list.
20 – 29Clear FailInadequate format & poor paragraphing / signposting.Inappropriate writing stylePoorly written &/or poor spelling & grammar.Inadequate evidence of knowledge & understanding with very limited exploration or omission of the major issues.Very limited understanding of topic with very limited reference to relevant sources and possible reference to irrelevant sourcesInadequate.Very limited evidence of analysis & application.Answer generally limited to description, some of which is inaccurate.InadequateInaccurate use of referencing system or absence of use of system
1 – 19Little or Nothing of meritNothing of merit.Poorly written work, lacking structure, paragraphing / signposting.Many inaccuracies in spelling & grammar.Nothing of merit.No evidence of appropriate knowledge & understanding.Nothing of meritNo breadth or depth to answer nor reference to relevant sources.Nothing of merit.No evidence of analysis & application.Nothing of meritReferencing system was not or very poorly used.

OSCOLA Quick Reference Guide

Primary Sources

Do not use full stops in abbreviations. Separate citations with a semi-colon.


Give the party names, followed by the neutral citation, followed by the Law Reports citation (eg AC, Ch, QB). If there is no neutral citation, give the Law Reports citation followed by the court in brackets. If the case is not reported in the Law Reports, cite the All ER or the WLR, or failing that a specialist report.

Corr v IBC Vehicles Ltd [2008] UKHL 13, [2008] 1 AC 884

R (Roberts) v Parole Board [2004] EWCA Civ 1031, [2005] QB 410

Page v Smith [1996] AC 155 (HL)

When pinpointing, give paragraph numbers in square brackets at the end of the citation. If the judgment has no paragraph numbers, provide the page number pinpoint after the court.

Callery v Gray [2001] EWCA Civ 1117, [2001] 1 WLR 2112 [42], [45]

Bunt v Tilley [2006] EWHC 407 (QB), [2006] 3 All ER 336 [1]–[37]

R v Leeds County Court, ex p Morris [1990] QB 523 (QB) 530–31

If citing a particular judge:

Arscott v The Coal Authority [2004] EWCA Civ 892, [2005] Env LR 6 [27] (Laws LJ)

Statutes and statutory instruments

Act of Supremacy 1558

Human Rights Act 1998, s 15(1)(b)

Penalties for Disorderly Behaviour (Amendment of Minimum Age) Order 2004, SI 2004/3166

EU legislation and cases

Consolidated Version of the Treaty on European Union [2008] OJ C115/13

Council Regulation (EC) 139/2004 on the control of concentrations between undertakings (EC Merger Regulation) [2004] OJ L24/1, art 5

Case C–176/03 Commission v Council [2005] ECR I–7879, paras 47–48

European Court of Human Rights

Omojudi v UK (2009) 51 EHRR 10

Osman v UK ECHR 1998–VIII 3124

Balogh v Hungary App no 47940/99 (ECHR, 20 July 2004)

Simpson v UK (1989) 64 DR 188

Secondary Sources


Give the author’s name in the same form as in the publication, except in bibliographies, where you should give only the surname followed by the initial(s). Give relevant information about editions, translators and so forth before the publisher, and give page numbers at the end of the citation, after the brackets.

Thomas Hobbes, Leviathan (first published 1651, Penguin 1985) 268

Gareth Jones, Goff and Jones: The Law of Restitution (1st supp, 7th edn, Sweet & Maxwell 2009)

K Zweigert and H Kötz, An Introduction to Comparative Law (Tony Weir tr, 3rd edn, OUP 1998)

Contributions to edited books

Francis Rose, ‘The Evolution of the Species’ in Andrew Burrows and Alan Rodger (eds), Mapping the Law: Essays in Memory of Peter Birks (OUP 2006)


Halsbury’s Laws (5th edn, 2010) vol 57, para 53

Journal articles

Paul Craig, ‘Theory, “Pure Theory” and Values in Public Law’ [2005] PL 440

When pinpointing, put a comma between the first page of the article and the page pinpoint.

JAG Griffith, ‘The Common Law and the Political Constitution’ (2001) 117 LQR 42, 64

Online journals

Graham Greenleaf, ‘The Global Development of Free Access to Legal Information’ (2010) 1(1) EJLT < http://ejlt.org//article/view/17 > accessed 27 July 2010

Command papers and Law Commission reports

Department for International Development, Eliminating World Poverty: Building our Common Future (White Paper, Cm 7656, 2009) ch 5

Law Commission, Reforming Bribery (Law Com No 313, 2008) paras 3.12–3.17

Websites and blogs

Sarah Cole, ‘Virtual Friend Fires Employee’ (Naked Law, 1 May 2009) <www.nakedlaw.com/2009/05/index.html> accessed 19 November 2009

Newspaper articles

Jane Croft, ‘Supreme Court Warns on Quality’ Financial Times (London, 1 July 2010) 3


Order your essay today and save 10% with the discount code ESSAYHELP