There are many laws in the world today that some may find are neither rational nor fair for all the parties involved in the situation. I have chosen two laws that I do not think are logical‚ these two are apparent authority and executory process. The first law I will be discussing is an agency this is the right one person has to execute business on behalf of another person or corporation. There are three important parties involved in an agency relationship; the agent (this is who can enter a contract
Premium Debt Law English-language films
BUSINESS LAW Course Code: MGBLW 10201 Credit Units: 03 No. of hours : 33 Course Objective: The objective of the course is to acquaint the management students with the basic fundamentals of business related laws and to understand its linkages with other fields of management which have significant bearing on business organization Course Contents: Module I: Companies Act‚ 1956 Meaning‚ definition and characteristics
Premium Contract Promissory note Corporation
agreement during their employment. They both left CH20 and went to work for Meras. According to their non-compete agreement from MERAS v. CH2O‚ INC Northern District of California (2013) “after they ceased working for CH20 they would not work for “any business of similar nature to that of [CH20] which is in competition with [CH20]” for the period of three years” When Beriner and Sughroue went to work for Meras they violated their non-compete agreement by not waiting the specified three years before taking
Premium Contract Supreme Court of the United States Court
1. Business law topics such as contracts‚ agency‚ and property are primarily governed by the common law. 1. True 2. False 2. In most states judges are appointed. 1. True 2. False 3. The rational relationship test is more exacting than the intermediate test. 1. True 2. False 4-6. Legislative law includes 4. City ordinances 1. True 2. False 5. The Uniform Commercial Code 1. True 2. False 6. The Restatement of Torts 1. True 2. False
Premium Common law United States Constitution United States
Sale of Goods Ordinance‚ Cap 26 shall apply in this case given the fact that the motorcycle seller sold the second hand motorcycle to Sam as a course of business‚ a legally binding contractual relationship for sale of goods was established although there was no information as to whether Sam bought the motorcycle was for business or private use. Besides‚ the car shall be defined as goods under (s.2(1)) of the aforesaid ordinance. The motorcycle seller was in breach of the implied conditions in
Premium Tort Tort law Reasonable person
a new dress‚ shoes and accessories for the date. He does not turn up and does not text you with an explanation. Can you sue him? If so‚ why? If not‚ why not? She would be unable to sue him as this is a social agreement which is unenforceable by law. Neither party has entered into a legally binding contract. Should you chose to break such an agreement‚ the consequences will be no more serious than upsetting or dissappointing your friends. This is similar to the case of Spellman v Spellman‚ in
Premium Contract
Two Types of Employment There are two categories of employment available to people: to be an employee or to be self-employed. These two types of employment are known as a ‘contract of service’ and a ‘contract for service’. Someone under a ‘contract of service’ refers to a person who is‚ for example a person working in a supermarket as a shop assistant is under a ‘contract of service’. In contrast‚ someone under a ‘contract for service’ refers to a person who is self-employed (also known as an ‘independent
Premium Employment
greatest contributors” to contract disputes? Why is it a good idea to use plain English instead of legalese when drafting a contract? What is a “letter of intent? ” What might be included in a letter of intent to avoid future disagreements over the legal effect of the letter? The two greatest contributors to contract disputes are a) failure to address all possible situations‚ whether deliberately or not‚ and b) ambiguity in the provisions that are included. It’s a good idea to use plain English in
Premium Contract Dispute resolution Sentence
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
DIRECTORS COLLEGE OF BUSINESS School of Accountancy BACHELOR OF BUSINESS STUDIES BACHELOR OF BUSINESS INFORMATION BACHELOR OF ACCOUNTANCY 155.203 Law of Business Organisations Semester 2 2008 Wellington Week 7 Lecture 2 21 DIRECTORS (1) 21.1 Who is a director? Section 126. gives an extended meaning to the term director in order that the persons who actually run the company are liable as such in law. 126 Meaning of “director” (1) In this Act‚ director‚ in relation to a company‚ includes—
Premium Physical exercise Acts of the Apostles Supreme Court of the United States