AIM University Group

Learning Outcome 1: Pass
Question 1 – Legal Systems and Sources of Law (AC 1.1 / AC 1.3) | PASS
You correctly identify statutory law and case law as two relevant sources, and your explanations are accurate and clearly written. Your statutory law example — hotels being fined for failing to maintain safe floors or food standards — is directly applicable to the industry. Your case law example about an airline or hotel overbooking and a court determining compensation is also appropriate and shows you understand how judicial precedent functions in practice. Your explanation of why understanding different legal systems matters internationally is well-reasoned, covering the distinction between common law and civil law systems and using booking contracts across different countries as a practical illustration.

Question 2 – Key Legal Concepts (AC 1.1 / AC 1.3) | PASS
Your contract definition is accurate, and all three essential elements — offer and acceptance, consideration, and intention to create legal relations — are correctly identified and explained with relevant hospitality examples. Your explanation of liability is concise and precise, and the wet floor example is one of the most commonly tested scenarios in hospitality law, demonstrating solid understanding of duty of care. Your explanation of intellectual property protection is brief but covers the key points, correctly noting that it protects brands, logos, and unique service content from being copied by competitors, with a practical eco-tour example.

Question 3 – Ethical Theories and Decision-Making (AC 1.2) | PASS
Your two theories — utilitarianism and deontology — are correctly identified and explained with clear, tourism-relevant examples. Your evaluation of hotel overbooking through a utilitarian lens is logically structured: you acknowledge the financial benefit to the business and employees, then correctly weigh this against the harm caused to displaced guests, concluding that the greatest good is not achieved and therefore overbooking is not ethically justified. This is sound ethical reasoning. Your response on why ethical decision-making supports long-term sustainability covers trust, environmental and community protection, legal risk reduction, and reputation, with a well-chosen example about staff treatment and local culture.

Question 4 – Regulations, Codes of Conduct and Industry Impact (AC 1.3) | PASS
Your three regulations — Consumer Protection Laws, Health and Safety Regulations, and the UNWTO Global Code of Ethics for Tourism — are all appropriate and correctly described. Your analysis of Health and Safety Regulations covers all three required dimensions: customers benefit from protection against accidents, employees are required to be trained and protected from injury, and businesses must maintain safe facilities or risk fines and lawsuits. Your explanation of the consequences of non-compliance is well-structured, addressing reputation damage through negative reviews, loss of customer trust, and the financial impact of fines, legal penalties, and recovery costs. Your fire safety example is strong and brings the consequences to life concretely.

Learning Outcome 2: Pass
For Learning Outcome 2, your plan shows clearly that you can recognise and assess the ethical dimensions of tourism business scenarios, which meets 2.1. You did not treat ethics as an afterthought; instead, you highlighted issues like greenwashing, cultural exploitation, privacy, and fair wages as central risks that IslandX must manage. Your written analysis of these dilemmas, including the way you considered different stakeholders (guests, local communities, staff, and the environment) and the possible consequences of poor decisions, amounts to a well-structured ethical analysis of real-world issues faced by tourism organisations, which satisfies 2.2. Throughout the term, you have also taken part in ethical debates and problem exercises, voicing and defending your perspective while listening to alternatives, which aligns with the expectations for role-playing and discussions under 2.3.

Learning Outcome 3: Pass
With Learning Outcome 3, your work shows that you can apply legal and ethical principles to complex, real-world situations. In your compliance plan you treated IslandX as a genuine business and applied the laws and ethical frameworks in a practical way to its operations, which fulfills 3.1. The document you produced is itself a comprehensive compliance programme for a hypothetical tourism operation: it includes policies, procedures, risk controls, training, monitoring, and review mechanisms, all grounded in relevant legislation and ethical standards, so you have clearly met 3.2. Your work also builds directly on the group-based IslandX project where you collaborated with classmates to shape the concept and respond to industry challenges, showing that you can work effectively in a team to address legal and ethical issues and propose actionable solutions, covering 3.3.

Learning Outcome 4: Pass
Finally, for Learning Outcome 4, your compliance plan demonstrates critical thinking and problem-solving abilities because you moved beyond simply listing rules and instead analysed where IslandX might face legal and ethical problems and suggested structured responses, meeting 4.1. The way you weighed different perspectives in your writing and during class discussions shows that you can think critically about conflicting legal and ethical viewpoints and defend your reasoning, which aligns with 4.2. In addition, the risk-focused sections of your plan effectively act as an ethical risk assessment for IslandX: you identified potential pitfalls such as misleading marketing, data breaches, labour non-compliance, and environmental harm, and you recommended strategies like clear policies, staff training, audits, and whistleblowing mechanisms to reduce those risks, which satisfies 4.3. Taken together, your written submission and your engagement throughout the course show that you have met all the pass criteria for this unit.