Journal entries — perpetual inventory system  

LO3, 4 On 28 February 2019, Darwin‐based entity, Phonee Partners, had inventory of 480 phones at a total cost of $153 600. The business maintains a perpetual inventory system. The following transactions occurred during March 2019.

March 2 Purchased 280 phones on credit for $280 each from Sutherland Electronics, DDP Darwin, terms 2/10, n/30. Sutherland Electronics also made a cash payment of $150 for freight on this date.

5 Sold 325 phones on credit to Phone Phanatics for $650 each.

8 Received $1680 credit for 6 damaged phones returned to Sutherland Electronics.

11 Paid Sutherland Electronics in full, less discount. Received payment in full from Phone Phanatics.

18 Sold 60 phones on credit to Kingsford Phones for $620 each; terms 2/10, n/30.

20 Purchased 80 phones on credit for $280 each from Oakhurst International, EXW Melbourne, terms 2/15, n/30. Oakhurst International also made a cash payment of $160 for freight on this date.

24 Received payment in full from Kingsford Phones, less discount.

26 Paid Oakhurst International in full, less discount.

29 Sold 98 phones on credit to Hinchinbrook Phone Shop for $650 each.

31 Granted Hinchinbrook Phone Shop $4550 credit for 7 phones returned, which cost $1960.

 Phonee Partners’ chart of accounts contained the following accounts: Cash at Bank, Sales, Accounts Receivable, Discount Allowed, Inventory, Sales Returns and Allowances, Accounts Payable, Cost of Sales, Discount Received.

Required (a) Prepare journal entries for the above transactions for the month of March 2019 for Phonee Partners.

I will pay for the following essay Law Course Work. The essay is to be 10 pages with three to five sources, with in-text citations and a reference page.

cedures agreements and other alternative methods of resolving disputes about employment rights. to provide for the adjustment of awards of compensation for unfair dismissal in cases where no use is made of internal procedures for appealing against dismissal. to make provision about cases involving both unfair dismissal and disability discrimination. and for connected purposes,” (Crown Copyright. 1998).

In Emily Worth’s case, a meeting was set on 17 July 2006, of which Worth was informed about in July 16, 2006. She was later handed a letter hours prior to the meeting signed by Head Teacher Pat Butcher alleging charges against Emily of “Abandoning your class, swearing and using abusive language, [and] ”refusal to co-operate with the legitimate management decisions of the Head Teacher and behaving in an unreasonable and unprofessional manner.” The letter also stated that the alleged offences were if proven would amount to gross misconduct.

In fact, gross misconduct which may merit instant dismissal requires acts such as failure to comply with reasonable and lawful instructions, theft, sale or consumption of alcohol, physical assault, breach of duty of confidentiality, sexual or racial harassment, fighting, and willful damage to an employers property, or attending work under the influence of prohibited drugs. The mentioned acts may not be exclusive but it has always been lawful that a proper investigation must be conducted of which the employees may also appeal.

Emily’s case will have to be evaluated based on applicable law, rules and regulations and jurisprudence. In this matter, the disciplinary hearing has to prove that due process has been undertaken prior to dismissal of Emily Worth.

There are two ways to show that a dismissal was not unfair, of which the employer or its representative must have a valid reason for dismissing an employee or that they have acted reasonably in the circumstances in that an adequate investigation must have been