Our orders are delivered strictly on time without delay
Double or single-spaced
12 Font Arial or Times New Roman
300 words per page
Our orders are delivered strictly on time without delay
Free Unlimited revisions
Money Return guarantee
Plagiarism Free Writing
Advanced Practice in Social Work/ Video Skills analysis Skill Analysis
Demonstrate an understanding and application of relevant literature, theory and ethics, and provide a concise, specific and accurate analysis of their own skills on the tape.
1. What have you learnt about yourself and your own practice style and approach in this course?
What did you learn from the feedback provided by the client/s and observer/s (e.g. peer and tutor feedback)?
How will what you have learnt assist you in practising as a social worker and in the future? (approx 150 words)
2. Reflect on your own interview/intervention with Jen and/or Mark.
What did you do well?
What social work skills, knowledge, values and theoretical approach were you drawing on?
What could you have done differently?
How will you do this differently in the future?
“the representing rule … material to all agreements and dealings “. This announcement was made by Lord Mansfield in 1766 and was an (unsuccessful) endeavor to raise great confidence to the level of a general standard, the custom-based law as it in this way created rejected his drive. The customary law of agreement, as it ended up built up in England in the second 50% of the nineteenth century, did not force or perceive a general obligation of good confidence. The thought of good confidence without a doubt swarms English law, however there is no single perceived principle of general application. The law is by and large prepared to strike against cases of lacking honesty: for instance where lies are told in pre-legally binding arrangements and where the powerless are misused or pressurized the use of ideas of agreement law will make such contracts void or voidable,. Be that as it may, no obligation or cure is to be hosted against the get-together who, acting in his own best advantages, separates from the arrangements. Besides, the customary perspective of the law is that amid the execution of an agreement one gathering’s inspiration isn’t important to characterize legally binding rights, nor may (“terrible”) thought processes increment the extent of express commitments. Beside particular kinds of agreements, protection being the remarkable case, there is no perceived additional legally binding obligation on one gathering to uncover realities that may end up being of significance to another . This can be diverged from the situation in different nations including Australia and Northern Ireland where the idea of good confidence is all the more promptly acknowledged. Steyn J who anticipated a future for good confidence precept in English law however such a future has tragically not created, or if to be sure it has created it has so in a piecemeal manner. Bingham L.J’s recognition has ended up being nearer to reality, he expressed when talking with reference to the consolidation of conditions in contracts: “The propensity of the English specialists has … been to take a gander at the idea of the exchange … what’s more, the character of the gatherings to it; to consider what see the gathering … was given of the specific condition …; and to determine whether in every one of the conditions it is reasonable for hold him bound by the condition. This may yield an outcome not altogether different from the common law guideline of good confidence, at any rate so far as the development of agreement is concerned .” The established hypothesis of agreement had all the earmarks of being unfriendly to the development of a general teaching of good confidence. Sir George Jessel M.R. underscored that their was a solid open enthusiasm for keeping up the thought of opportunity of agreement which would essentially reject the idea of good confidence : “In the event that there is one thing which more than another open arrangement requires it is that men of full and able comprehension might have the most extreme freedom of contracting, and that their agreements when gone into unreservedly and deliberately should be held consecrated and might be upheld by Courts of equity. In this way you have this principal open strategy to consider that you are not daintily to meddle with this flexibility of agreement.” A gathering to an agreement could consequently expect that the agreement would be implemented by its terms regardless of whether the terms were uncalled for. Regardless of these early reluctances to incorporate great confidence as a component of agreement law, it rose as a critical and important part in a few parts of agreement law. The advanced law of agreement puts more accentuation on direct which assesses the interests of the other party to the agreement . Some of these particular conditions will now be considered, The customary law forces an obligation of good confidence in protection contracts. The necessity of most extreme great confidence in protection contracts requires exposure by the guaranteed of any reality material to the hazard and abstention from deception. The legitimization for the formation of the obligation is that exclusive the safeguarded knows the material actualities and the back up plan has no sensible methods for finding them, despite the fact that this same contention could be progressed in regard of general contract law. Another part of good confidence emerging out of protection contracts is the decide that a back up plan settling claims under a constrained obligation approach must act in compliance with common decency towards the safeguarded and should have respect to his or her interests both in the guard of activities against the guaranteed and in their settlement . The Supreme Court of Ireland have taken an altogether different view to the rule of good confidence in protection law and this is best featured by the instance of Aro Road and Land Vehicles Ltd v Insurance Corporation of Ireland for this situation the guaranteed wished to send products by street by means of a transporter. At the bearer’s prompting they affected protection, the transporters going about as the safety net provider’s specialists for this reason. They were approached just for the points of interest of the trip and the estimation of the merchandise, and did not volunteer any additional data. The lorry conveying the products was seized and set ablaze, yet the guarantors declined to pay out on the arrangement, arguing that the guaranteed had neglected to reveal that their overseeing chief had, exactly 20 years already, been indicted various offenses of getting stolen engine vehicles, for which he had served a sentence of 21 months detainment. The choice for this situation was in summation this was not reason enough for the protection arrangement to be refuted and the thinking was that there is no break of most extreme great confidence if the proposer has truly overlooked a material actuality, in any event where there is nothing (eg a proposition frame) to refresh his memory. Most extreme great confidence, they say, requires a bona fide exertion at precision, however does not require the proposer totally to ensure the exactness (and by suggestion the fulfillment) of his divulgence. This demonstrates an innate adaptability in the courts of Ireland to use and reject the thought of good confidence in a sensible way and this is obvious in the general use of good confidence in Ireland. Again in Contracts for the offer of land the seller of land is under an obligation to reveal material issues identifying with the title which are known to the merchant however which the buyer has no methods for finding . The obligation of good confidence likewise exists in the accompanying circumstances, the mortgagee’s activity of an energy of offer, in connection to the standards of value representing trustees, undue impact and unconscionable lead and estoppel, incorporating promissory estoppel and in the obligation to avoid making distortions. All the more vitally it is proposed that in specific circumstances there exists a custom-based law obligation on the gatherings to an agreement to co-work in accomplishing the objects of the agreement. Where the gatherings have concurred that something should be done which is impossible unless the two gatherings concur in doing it, there is an inferred commitment on each gathering to do all that is important to be done on his or her part for the completing of the thing . This can be seen particularly on account of Meehan v. Jones where execution of the agreement was restrictive on the buyer getting endorsement for back on palatable terms. Wilson J considered that there was a commitment on the buyer to endeavor sensible endeavors to acquire fund on such terms, however we questioned that the buyer was required to accomplish more than act sincerely in choosing whether to acknowledge or dismiss an offer of back. That way to deal with the circumstance offered impact to the desires of the gatherings and accomplished a reasonable and sensible adjust of their interests. Another imperative component of the idea of good confidence is that that can be found in the thought of guardian connections. The standards of a guardian relationship require the exposure of material issues and require the trustee to subordinate his or her interests to the honest to goodness interests of another by reason of the relationship which subsists between the two gatherings. It can obviously be contended that the trustee standard is more grounded than the great confidence regulation in that it offers supremacy to the interests of the gathering to whom the guardian commitment is owed. The great confidence teaching is worried about the individuals who contract and are on an equivalent balance. The standard of good confidence additionally discovers ground in the convention of “unconscionable haggling”, this is where alleviation is conceded when an exchange, is unconscionable to the point that it can’t be permitted to stand. The prerequisite is in this manner that there exists an unconscientious exploiting the genuine incapacity or detriment of the individual in the substandard bartering position by securing or holding the advantage being referred to in a way that is both preposterous and harsh . . In Australia, unconscionability has been depended upon as a ground in mitigating a buyer from relinquishment of his fair enthusiasm under an agreement of offer according to a notice setting aside a few minutes of the substance of the agreement prompting rescission of the agreement . When alleviation against relinquishment was accessible particular execution of the agreement could be requested. The buyer had gone into ownership under the agreement and raised a house on the land however was not able pay the adjust of the price tag on the due date. This approach was taken further on account of a portion contract for the offer of land under which the buyers had been let into ownership, however they were not qualified for ownership until fruition, and had fabricated a house on the land . Once more, the agreement had been revoked, this time for non-installment of a portion. In this example the larger part compared a terms contract to a home loan, the relinquishment arrangement being by method for security for the installment of the price tag so that there was no compelling reason to build up unconscionable conduct of an outstanding kind. In Australia, the rising up out of the shadows of this ground of evenhanded alleviation has consigned the teaching of undue impact to a place of relative irrelevance. Unconscion>