Answer:
The British approach appears to be more effective and even more efficient.
Explanation:
The British approach eliminates the tendency of lawyers to coach the witnesses to produce required answers. This means that using the British approach, witnesses are not properly prepared with correctly rehearsed answers to questions. The discovery of the case by both lawyers happens in the courtroom and not at a pretrial stage. With the British approach, courtroom lawyers are responsible for conducting the opening statement, direct examination of witnesses, closing statement, and cross-examination of witnesses.
The factor should a plaintiff consider when deciding which interference tort applies to a situation is that
- The plaintiff must a contract that is with a third party;
- The defendant must know about the contract at the time of the alleged interference
- The defendant must have interfered intentionallly and the interference was not right
- The actions of defendant’s led to a breach of the contract
- The plaintiff has suffered some measure of damage as a result
- The defendant knew a contract between the plaintiff and a third party existed.
For better understanding let's explain what tort interference means
- There are two types of tortious interference
- Tortious interference with contract
- Tortious interference with good economic advantage.
- Tort interference is regarded as an issue where one party was involved in something or does a thing to intentionally disregard another party’s business transactions or project
From the above we can therefore say that the answer the factors should a plaintiff consider when deciding which interference tort applies to a situation is that:
- The plaintiff must a contract that is with a third party;
- The defendant must know about the contract at the time of the alleged interference
- The defendant must have interfered intentionallly and the interference was not right
- The actions of defendant’s led to a breach of the contract
- The plaintiff has suffered some measure of damage as a result
- The defendant knew a contract between the plaintiff and a third party existed is correct
Learn more Tort interference from:
brainly.com/question/15058912
LOL you must have a bad taste in music
Answer:
Explanation:
Utterly true.
I once asked my wife to teach me to draw an Erlenmeyer flask. She showed me, and she's a good teacher. Then she said "Draw 50 of these. By the time you've done that, you should see how the lines work." She was wrong. My first flask was no worse nor better than the 50th one and I never did see how the lines worked.
I can do math, but my drawings look like I never graduated from Grade 1.
