Answer:
Explain factors taken into consideration to determine the similarity of a name for it to be called “undesirable” under section 24 of the Companies Act (Chapter 24:03
Clear and present danger test, says speech may be restricted if evidence exists that such expression would endanger the public.
<h3>What is a clear and present danger test?</h3>
The clear and present danger test stressed that
printed or spoken word may not be the subject of previous restraint.
Unless there is a danger created by that expression, this test was originated in Schenck v. the United States.
Learn more about clear and present danger test at;
brainly.com/question/24452126
Answer:
Motion for the extension of time for release of evidence
Explanation:
This is a pretrial application made by the prosecuting attorney on behalf of the claimant seeking for an extension of time for the release of evidence by the prime witnesses in order to prove the guilt of the accused person in the commission of the offence of arson.
In otherwords, Eleanor as the prosecuting attorney who has a strong case against the defendant needs time to prove to the court that the defendant is guilty of the offence of arson through the evidence of the prime eye-witnesses who were present at the scene where the offence was committed.
The advise that should be given to Tanya in this situation is the fact that she cannot be sued by Ramona due to the fact that the contract can be considered as a voidable one.
<h3>What is a voidable contract?</h3>
This a contract that was entered between two parties that may not be enforceable due to several existing legal reasons.
This contract is voidable due to the age of Tanya. She was 15 when she entered the contract. This age is considered as a minor age.
Read more on contracts here: brainly.com/question/984979
Answer:
the Supreme Court would say the age of 21 is legal age for purchase
