The case I have chosen is Meras Engineering‚ INC.‚ et al. (Plaintiffs) V. CH20‚ INC.‚ et al.‚ (Defendants). Meras Engineering is a provider of water treatment solutions. They develop products that treat industrial and agricultural water applications. CH20 is a similar company that provides clients with chemicals that control the biological fouling in cooling towers. Rich Beriner and Jay Sughroue were employed by CH20 and signed a non-compete agreement during their employment. They both left
Premium Contract Supreme Court of the United States Court
Definition of Law a. Law is defined as a set of rules and principles by which a community regulates its activities. b. Law is different and yet similar because it can be applied differently across various borders. c. Unlike law‚ internal rules and regulations of clubs‚ societies and other organizations may only be enforced within the group that governs them. d. Law is therefore concerned with the legal rights and obligations of individuals‚ business organizations‚ various entities
Premium Law Common law
BUSINESS LAW ASSIGNMENT MANAGEMENT AND DEVELOPMENT INSTITUTE OF SINGAPORE UNIVERSITY OF BRADFORD DIPLOMA IN BUSINESS MANAGEMENT DBMD21176B BUSINESS LAW ASSIGNMENT GROUP MEMBERS NO NAME FIN NUMBER PM 1. SHIVRAJ PATEL G1099448P 2. DINESH JAGWANI G1096070W 3. ANDREY SAPUTROSUGO G1100087N DATE: ANALYSIS /40 RESEARCH /30 ORGANIZATION /15 PRESENTATION /15 NAME OF LECTURER: Mr. DANIEL THEYAGU BUSINESS LAW ASSIGNMENT CONTRIBUTION TO THE CLASS ASSIGNMENT MADE BY
Premium Corporation Types of business entity Common law
with few levels of management‚ decision to refund is made there and then. By removing 2 management levels this decreases the businesses cost by not having to pay 10 managers salaries which are very high‚ this would mean that in the long term the company would save a huge amount of money which in turn means that
Premium Marketing Management Electric car
Business Law “The doctrine laid down in Salomon v Salomon & Co Ltd [1897] AC 22 has to be watched very carefully. It has often been supposed to cast a veil on the personality of a limited company through which the courts cannot see. But that is not true. The courts can‚ and often do‚ draw aside the veil. They can‚ and often do‚ pull off the mark. They look to see what really lies behind” - Lord Denning in Littlewoods Mail Order Stores v Inland revenue Commissioners [1969] 3 All ER 422.
Premium Corporation Law
BUSINESS LAW (BBL 2014) TRIMESTER 1‚ 2013/2014 SESSION Assignment title: Comparative Study and Analysis of The Laws of Malaysia and United States PREPARED BY: STUDENT NAME STUDENT ID ITTIPORN PRASERTSIT 1092701396 ER CHEE ZHENG 1102700368 ALI JAVIDFAR 1101106508 MUHAMMAD ASYRAF SHABARUDDIN 1061111744 SHAHIN BAGHERI 1092700846 PREPARED FOR: DR. BAHMA A/P A SIVASUBRAMANIAM
Premium Contract
COLLEGE OF BUSINESS TMC COLLEGE LAW Individual Assignment The Importance of Understanding Business Law in Malaysia PREPARED FOR Mr. William Tan PREPARED BY Ilyassova Daniya SUBMISSION DATE 2 June 2014 Table of Content No. Details Page When doing a business it is important to understand laws that apply to your business‚ laws depend on the country you live in‚ but there are many
Premium Law Business
Executive Summary Various issues in the common law arise when agents make contracts on behalf of principals. Should a principal be bound when his agent makes a contract on his behalf that he would immediately wish to disavow? The tradeoffs resemble those in tort‚ so the least-cost avoider principle is useful for deciding which agreements are binding and can unify a number of different doctrines in agency law. In particular‚ an efficiency explanation can be found for the undisclosed-principal rule
Premium Contract
Salesperson Applicable Law 1: Issue This issue is whether the advertisement brochure is an invitation to treat. It is also important to note whether the exemption clause in the brochure makes the invitation to treat‚ permanent. Applicable Law Firstly‚ an invitation to treat is not an offer. It is an invitation for an offeror to begin negotiations‚ make an offer‚ but does not offer a contract. Advertisements can only be seen as an invitation to treat. In the case of Partridge v Crittenden
Premium Contract
THE LAW OF BUSINESS ORGANIZATIONS CHAPTER 4 – Piercing the Corporate Veil Minne B Berkey v Third Avenue Railway Company Overview: This is a New York Court of Appeals decision in 1926 adjudicated by the legendary Justice Cardozo. In this seminal case on ‘piercing the corporate veil’‚ the Court of Appeals finds in favor of the Defendant‚ Third Avenue Railway Company. The Court holds that Third Avenue‚ the parent company of Forty-second Street Company‚ which operated a rail line upon which the
Premium Corporation Subsidiary Appeal