All categories

3 years ago

___ is the courts do not consider legitimate competitive behavior permissible if it results in the breaking of a contract.

Business

1 answer:

grandymaker [24]3 years ago

3 0

Answer:tortious interference

Explanation:

tortious interference is a law term that comes to mind when there is a breach of contract resulting from the competitor's actions. Tortious interference in Tort law(an area of law) deals with the situation in which there is damage to property emanating from intentional or negligent acts of the defendant, in this case the competitor in business. In which case the actions(competitive behaviour) of defendant is not justifiable and permissible and simultaneously breaches contract of plaintiff, it becomes tortious interference.

You might be interested in

vanhoe Company reported the following results for the year ended December 31, 2021, its first year of operations: 2021 Income (p

stich3 [128]

Answer:

the deferred tax liability for the year ended is $297,500

Explanation:

The computation of the net deferred tax or liability is as follows:

= (Taxable income - income before income taxes) × enacted tax rate

= ($2,700,000 - $1,510,000) × 0.25

= $1,190,000 × 0.25

= $297,500

Therefore the deferred tax liability for the year ended is $297,500

Hence, the same is to be considered

6 0

3 years ago

Royal Chocolatier, a British manufacturer of chocolates, granted U.S. company American Candy Inc. the right to produce and sell

WINSTONCH [101]

Answer:

Royal Chocolatier is licensing their product line to American Candy.

Explanation:

Licensing agreements are useful because both the licensee (company receiving the license) and licensor (company granting the license) are benefited:

The licensor benefits since the licensee bears all the costs and risks of the new activity.
The licensee is able to sell a well established and recognized brand without having to develop the brand themselves.

Licensing results in the licensee bearing the costs and risks.

8 0

3 years ago

Cora owns a Christian bookstore and tries to run it in accordance with Judeo-Christian values, which promotes charity among the

ludmilkaskok [199]

Answer:

not acceptable because stealing is never justifiable.

Explanation:

Margo has been taking money without Cora's knowledge and giving to the homeless, this is stealing and even though Margo is trying to justify it by giving to the homeless it still does not change the fact that she is wrong.

Judeo-Christian values promotes charity among the poor but also strictly prohibits theft. So Marco should have told Cora what he intended to do.

5 0

4 years ago

A rational decisionmaker

Tom [10]

The Answer is Option B.

3 0

3 years ago

A company is considering buying a new piece of machinery. A 10% interest rate will be used in the computations. Two models of th

JulsSmile [24]

Answer:

Machine I

capitalized cost: 230,271.28

EAC: $ 27,047.58

Machine II

EAC: $ 27,377.930

As Machine I cost per year is lower it is better to purchase that one.

Annual deposits to purchase Machine I in 20 years: $ 1,396.770

return of machine I with savings of 28,000 per year: 10.51%

Explanation:

WE calculate the present worth of each machine and then calculate the equivalent annual cost:

MACHINE 1

Operating cost:

$C \times \frac{1-(1+r)^{-time} }{rate} = PV\\$

C 18,000

time 20

rate 0.1

$18000 \times \frac{1-(1+0.1)^{-20} }{0.1} = PV\\$

PV $153,244.1470

Salvage value:

$\frac{Maturity}{(1 + rate)^{time} } = PV$

Maturity $20,000.0000

time 20.00

rate 0.1

$\frac{20000}{(1 + 0.1)^{20} } = PV$

PV 2,972.87

Total: -80,000 cost - 153,244.15 annual cost + 2,972.87 salvage value:

Total: 230,271.28

$PV \div \frac{1-(1+r)^{-time} }{rate} = C\\$

Present worth $(230,271.28)

time 20

rate 0.1

$-230271.28 \div \frac{1-(1+0.1)^{-20} }{0.1} = C\\$

C -$ 27,047.578

Fund to purchase in 20 years:

$FV \div \frac{(1+r)^{time} -1}{rate} = C\\$

FV $80,000.00

time 20

rate 0.1

$80000 \div \frac{(1+0.1)^{20} -1}{0.1} = C\\$

C $ 1,396.770

IF produce a 28,000 savings:

we must solve using a financial calcualtor for the rate at which the capitalized cost equals 28,000

$PV \div \frac{1-(1+r)^{-time} }{rate} = C\\$

PV $230,271.28

time 20

rate 0.105126197

$230271.28 \div \frac{1-(1+0.105126197287798)^{-20} }{0.105126197287798} = C\\$

C $ 28,000.000

rate of 0.105126197 = 10.51%

<u>Machine II</u>

100,000 cost

25,000 useful life

15,000 operating cost during 10 years

20,000 for the next 15 years

Present value of the operating cost:

$C \times \frac{1-(1+r)^{-time} }{rate} = PV\\$

C 15,000

time 10

rate 0.1

$15000 \times \frac{1-(1+0.1)^{-10} }{0.1} = PV\\$

PV $92,168.5066

$C \times \frac{1-(1+r)^{-time} }{rate} = PV\\$

C 20,000

time 15

rate 0.1

$20000 \times \frac{1-(1+0.1)^{-15} }{0.1} = PV\\$

PV $152,121.5901

in the timeline this is at the end of the 10th year we must discount as lump sum for the other ten years:

$\frac{Maturity}{(1 + rate)^{time} } = PV$

Maturity $152,121.5901

time 10.00

rate 0.1

$\frac{152121.590126167}{(1 + 0.1)^{10} } = PV$

PV 58,649.46

salvage value

$\frac{Maturity}{(1 + rate)^{time} } = PV$

Maturity $25,000.0000

time 25.00

rate 0.1

$\frac{25000}{(1 + 0.1)^{25} } = PV$

PV 2,307.40

Total cost: 100,000 + 92,168.51 + 58,649.46 - 2,307.40 = $248,510.57

$PV \div \frac{1-(1+r)^{-time} }{rate} = C\\$

PV $248,510.57

time 25

rate 0.1

$248510.57 \div \frac{1-(1+0.1)^{-25} }{0.1} = C\\$

C $ 27,377.930

4 0

4 years ago