In this example, Kiwanuka is suing for intentional infliction of emotional distress. This can be defined as extreme and outrageous conduct which results in severe emotional distress to another person. This act must be severely extreme, to an extent that is not normally tolerated by society. In such cases, threatening conduct coupled with repeated annoyances can be enough to offer support to a claim of intentional infliction of emotional distress.
If I were the judge, I would rule in favor of Kiwanuka, as I the fact that Bakilana held Kiwanuka in isolation and confiscated her passport is evidence of extreme emotional distress.
Answer:
The correct answer is predatory pricing.
Explanation:
When we speak of the legal right "defense of free competition", what we are referring to, in very simple words, is a field of law that seeks to safeguard that competition in the markets occurs "in good and sound fashion", this it is, without cheating, fraud or other "abusive" devices that are apt to achieve, maintain or increase the market power of those who execute them, thereby damaging the collective well-being of the economic agents participating in those markets (and not only the of the individuals directly involved in a certain transaction).
Answer:
All of them is wrong. It's E. You
Explanation:
Answer: The correct answers are "A. Accept" and "$ 0.01".
Explanation: Given that we talk about optimal strategy when maximizing the expected profit by the player:
In the first case It is convenient to accept the proposal and keep $ 0.12, instead of rejecting it and running out of nothing.
And in the second case it is convenient to give the classmate as little as possible so that he accepts and we have a greater profit.
