Answer:
Check the following explanation
Explanation:
a) Usually a contract has the following elements:
Offer
.
Acceptance
.
Consideration
.
Intention to create a legal relationship
.
In the given case, the intention to create a legal relationship is missing. Though Study had sent a written legal contract to Burrow to affirm the contract, Burrow did not show any interest regarding the same. Hence Burrow can’t be sued for breach of contracts. Moreover the confirmation letter sent by Study does not qualify under the Merchant Memo Rule as the involved parties are not merchants. Burrow can use the terms of UCC for his favour. The UCC states that any contract with value more than $500 must be in writing. As the involved amount in this case is $1300, hence this case does not qualify as a contract under UCC.
b) If Study and Burrow were merchants, then the Merchant Memo Rule gets applicable. Then in that case, if 2 merchants enter into an oral contract, which is worth $500 or more and one of the merchant sends a written confirmation for the same, then a contract will be considered enforceable. In such a case, Burrow will be held liable for breach of contract and can be sued by Study.
Answer:
Five examples that support successfulness of the competition policy of South Africa are: 1) The product choices along with its competitive prices were provided to the consumers. 2) Practices such as horizontal collusion and resale price maintenance was declared unlawful in 1984.
Explanation:
Answer:
The price of the stock is $38.33
Explanation:
The dividend growth is zero on a preferred stock thus its dividends are just like a perpetuity as the stocks have no defined life. The formula for the price or value of a perpetuity or the zero growth model is,
P0 = D / r
Where,
D is the dividend
r is the required rate of return
Thus, the price of the stock is:
P0 = 3.22 / 0.084 = $38.33
Globalizationvery useful for health insurance to take advantage of medical tourism, medical tourism is traveling
