Answer:
Investments
Explanation:
If the note receivable is expected to be received in 12 then it is listed as a Current Asset else as Investments.
For further detail in how you can recognize Financial instrument ,please refer to the accounting rules for this type of accounts in https://www.iasplus.com/en/standards/ias/ias39
The thing which the Supreme Court ruled in <em>Burwell v. Hobby Lobby </em>with regard to the Affordable Care Act's requirement was:
- Birth control could be denied
<h3>What is a Court Ruling?</h3>
This refers to the general decision which a competent law court has taken after deliberations of the evidence, witnesses and other available information of a case to the best determination of the judge.
With this in mind, we can see that from the Burwell v. Hobby Lobby case, there was a ruling against birth control access which meant that birth control could be denied to employees and this was with regard to the Affordable Care Act's requirement.
Read more about court rulings here:
brainly.com/question/17040608
Answer: in business a jobber is a manufacturer, tradesman, or wholesaler who deals in small lots of goods or 'jobs,' or acts as an agent, middleman (intermediary), or a sub-contractor, and usually does not deal directly with the principal customer.
Explanation: a jobber is also an informal name for a broker or someone that negotiates with shares or stocks.
Answer:
The business judgement rule states that if the board takes decision in good faith and in best interest of the corporation considering the information available then its decision is not to be questioned by the courts. The courts can intervene only if there is any breach of good faith, due care or loyalty.
The above case is similar in facts with another case paramount vs time. In that case Time decided to merge with another company named Warner. Paramount also started bidding for Time but the directors of Time rejected their bid offer citing that warner merger would be more suitable for the company strategy.
Paramount then brought the case against Time in court.The court stated that the instant case was different from another case (REVLON VS MacAndrews) where Revlon was up for sale and hence it was necessary for the board to sell its assets to the highest bidder.
