Answer:
The entry is not required because the outcome is reasonably possible, not certain or probable. So IAS 37 says that the liability must not be recognized as the outcome is not reasonably certain or probable.
Explanation:
The liability must be included in the financial statement only if the outcome is certain or probable. In this scenario, the outcome is reasonably possible but neither certain nor probable in this situation. So the entry in the financial statement is not required. If the liability is of a huge amount then IAS 37 says that their must be a disclosure in the financial statement notes about the lawsuit.
Answer:
B
Explanation:
Bid rotation is when contractors collude and take turns in winning a bid. Colluding contractors submit bids but take turns being the low bidder.
Bid-tailoring is when an employee in collusion with a contractor tailors bid specifications to give an unfair advantage to a certain contractor.
Complementary bids are bids intended only to give the appearance of a genuine bid. Colluding bidders submit higher priced or deliberately defective bids to in order to ensure the selection of the designated winner at inflated prices.
Phantom bids are fake bids
The correct answer is option D, uninsured motorists protection
In the uninsured motorists protection, an individual gets medical insurance who has faced accident due to low liability of the driver (or any person driving the car) to meet the expenses of the accident as he was not having insurance
Most likely, Shaq will ask that the court overturn the award based on the acceptance of the bribe by Pat.
Option - b
<u>Explanation:
</u>
Arbitration is a method to solve quarrels outside the court. The quarrel will be decided by the arbitral tribunal which gives the arbitration award. This award is lawfully compulsory from both the parties and enforceable in the courts.
The court can impose but these awards will be overturned by the court only in special cases. The court will declare void, or ignore to accept an arbitration award if it is a fraud product or misbehavior by the arbitrator.
I would go with D because it makes more sense
