Answer:
<em>Ratification by Principal One of the criteria for enactment is that all material truths involved in the transaction must be known to the Principal. Van Stavern was not aware of Hash's behaviour. </em>
He did not realize that somehow the steel is being shipped under his name, and that the shipments were being billed him directly. Unlike liability through obvious authority, approval by the principal is a positive act by which he or she acknowledges the agent's illegal actions.
Just a principal would ratify; thus, Van Stavern was not directly imputed to information by the invoices and checks signed by Van Stavern's workers.
The court stated that the use of corporate checks was further proof that Van Stavern regarded the expenditures as business, not private. So Van Stavern could not be held personally liable.
Remember that on Sutton Steel that's not excessively harsh. Sutton understood it was working with a building company and did not seek to get the personal approval of the contract from Van Stavern.
<em>Lawfully, Sutton's agreement in this case is called an unaccepted offer which can be withdrawn at any time.</em>
<em></em>
Answer:
3.020
Explanation:
Morrit Corporation
interest amount = $1,080,000*.11 = $118,800
Net profit = 3% *$6,000,000= $180,000
Net profit + tax = profit before tax =
180000/.75 = 240000
Profit before tax + Interest = Earning before interest and tax
= $240,000+$118,800 = $358,800
TIE ratio= EBIT/Interest = $358,800/118,800
= 3.020
Therefore the TIE ratio is 3.020
ROI is the answer to this question. ROI or Return of
Investment is when the capital is now gained back and the business computes the
amount of profit during the time the investment was returned. Return of
investment is computed by dividing the benefit of investment over the cost of investment.
