Question 1= A, question B=D
Court precedents are used in case of having no clear interpretation of the law for a particular case. President's precedents are simply acts performed by a President in a similar situation.
Explanation:
<u>Court precedents serve as an alternate to written laws when the existing guided laws are not suitable or simply not enough for a particular situation that arises.</u>
For this, the court can refer to a previous judgement as basis for their own judgement. <u>Thus, court precedents are enforceable by law.</u>
<u>Precedents set by a President serve at best, as guidelines.</u>
They are simply acts performed by a previous President when met with a similar situation.
Northern city is the answer
This is FALSE. I say this because a hypothesis is a statement which is not universally true. More research has to be carried out for it to become a law. Which is a proven fact. Hope i helped. Have a nice day.
