2009年6月ACCA：F4试题评分标准二

　　6 This question requires candidates to explain the operation of the Company Directors Disqualification Act 1986.

　　8-10 marks        Thorough to complete answers， showing a detailed understanding of the legislation.

　　5-7 marks        A clear understanding of the topic， but perhaps lacking in detail.

　　2-4 marks        Some knowledge， although perhaps not clearly expressed， or very limited in its knowledge and understanding of the topic.

　　0-1 mark        Little or no knowledge of the topic.

　　7 This question is divided into two parts and requires candidates to explain some essential terms in relation to the United Nations Convention on International Bills Of Exchange and International Promissory Notes：

　　（a） Requires a definition of what is actually meant by an international bill of exchange.

　　3-4 marks        A thorough explanation of the topic with references to the Convention provisions.

　　0-2 marks        Some but little or no understanding of the topic.

　　（b） Requires an explanation of the roles of some specific parties.

　　5-6 marks A thorough explanation of the meaning and operation of endorsement

　　2-4 marks        Some general understanding， but perhaps lacking in specific information.

　　0-1 mark        Little if any understanding.

　　8 This question requires candidates to explain the circumstances under which a party can avoid a contract under the UN Convention on the International Sale of Goods on the grounds of anticipatory breach of contract. It requires candidates to analyse a problem scenario and explain and apply the law appropriately.

　　8-10 marks        Good to complete answer which shows thorough knowledge of the appropriate provisions of the convention and applies them accurately.

　　5-7 marks        Fair explanation of the convention as it applies to anticipatory breach of contract， but perhaps lacking in detail， or only dealing well with one aspect.

　　0-4 marks        Some basic knowledge of what is involved in anticipatory breach under the Convention， but no real depth of understanding. Perhaps an unbalanced answer that only deals with one part of the question.

　　9 This question requires a consideration of the statutory duties placed on company directors under the Companies Act 2006.

　　8-10 marks        Thorough to complete answers， showing a detailed understanding of the rules relating to conflict of interest.

　　5-7 marks        A clear understanding of the topic but perhaps lacking in detail or application.

　　2-4 marks        Some knowledge， although perhaps not clearly expressed， or very limited in its application.

　　0-1 mark        Little or no knowledge of the topic.

　　10 This question requires candidates to explain the meaning and regulation of the two criminal offences of insider dealing and money laundering and apply that law to a problem scenario.

　　8-10 marks        Clear analysis of the problem scenario - recognition of both the criminal law issues raised and a convincing application of the legal principles to the facts.

　　6-7 marks        Sound analysis of the problem - recognition of the major principles involved and a fair attempt at applying them. Perhaps sound in knowledge but lacking in analysis and application.

　　3-5 marks        Unbalanced answer perhaps showing some appropriate knowledge but weak in analysis or application.

　　0-2 marks        Very weak answer showing little analysis， appropriate knowledge or application.

[上一页]