Business Law Questions
Business Law Questions
This is the most suitable theory for the partners and the breach of contract. The breach of warranty highlights the damages which are available to the disappointed buyer when the specific seller has breached the article which explicitly stipulates the qualitative warranties. This implies that any buyer who unconditionally allows products that are nonconforming and who also follow the other conditions before he/she recovers the goods has the right to claim warranty.
Consequently, a breach of contract claim exists when the seller fails even to deliver the products when the need arise. This implies that in order to provide solution to the problems which arouse both from the breach of warranty and contract calls for both the buyer and the seller to undertake the following: The buyer can reject the product or evocates for the acceptance of the same product and many more.
The main constitutional theory which might assist Joan and Doan in their pursuit to the case is the negligence theory. According to this theory, personal injuries and losses are based on the individual negligence and carelessness on the already acquired information.Therefore in the case above, though Joan and Doan may he held liable for the customers’ injuries, but the customers may also be negligent because they had already been warned against the animals but still associate themselves with them. Therefore the customers’ damages ought to be reduced by the percentage of their liability.
The defendant should l claim that the injured party contributed to his or her own harm, and thus the defendant should not be held liable. The party who has been injured was the contributory negligent hence the defendants should not be recover the injuries. The second augment which the defendant emphasizes is the Assumption of Risk.
it is clear that the injured party engaged in a dangerous activity, and the court should work on the assumption that he or she assumed the risks connected with the harmful activity and is the one solely responsible for their losses and injuries.They should also claim that they arenot responsible for the injuries because defendant did not contribute in any way to the cause of the injury, something else did. Therefore with all these justifications, they should fill case against the public.
Fiduciary roles demand that the fiduciary acts individually in the according to the interest and principal of the employer.it should be free of any self-dealing, clashes of interest, or other misuse of the power for personal satisfaction and advantage. Therefore the company will be successful in the case because of the following affidavit. The directors abused the duty of Loyalty which requires that the employee and agent acts individually in the best interest of the employer, and should be free from any self-dealing, conflicts of interest, or other abuse of the power and position for personal benefits. Secondly, the employees also did not undertake their duty with Care which states that fiduciaries who act carelessly and recklessly are responsible for any loss emerging to the corporate shareholders and other directors. Therefore the company will automatically succeed in their pursuit for the breach of fiduciary contract by the directors.
For the board to access the land for natural gas, they should first understand and follow the steps of mineral ownership.They should first find out if the rights of the mineral are available for purchase. Secondly, they should keenly investigate the chain of ownership on mineral rights, since these rights might have changed hands many times. They should also define the type of mineral present in the state where the land is located. They also need to negotiate the terms and conditions of the mineral sale. Lastly they should come up with the mineral rights agreement in order to ensure that bothparties understand all the terms set before the actual sealing of the deal.
Emerson, R. W. (2009). Business Law. U.S.A: Barron's Educational Series.
Gaylord A. Jentz, R. L. (2010). Business Law: Text and Cases : Legal, Ethical, Global, and Corporate Environment. London: Cengage Learning.