Answer:
Answer:
At a federalist rally of about 12,500 people which was held at the Verdun Auditorium on October 24
Explanation:
Charest further emphasized his commitment to constitutional reform if a "No" victory was achieved.
Explanation:
Answer:
Okay, so the first one is both because both lands could be sold at this time,
The second one is American steelers,
The Third is Native America,
And finally, the last one is Both,
(the last one was obvious you should of know one at least!)
Explanation:
I’m not sure of 1 and 2 but i know 3 is “yes because and object can be elevated above the ground and be moving at the same time”
The correct answer would be option C, It is void.
An unscrupulous investor completes a contract with a buyer to sell a property the investor does not own. This sales contract for the transaction is Void.
Explanation:
When something is not legally bounded, or there is no legal restrictions to carry that thing, then this would be considered void. An invalid, null or cancelled thing is called as void.
So according to the question, when a dishonest, and unfair person or investor makes a deal with the buyer to sell a property which he does not own, and goes into a contract with him, then the contract is void, because the person himself does not own the property he is going to sell. There will be no legal binding of this contract.
Learn more about Void Contract at:
brainly.com/question/9582675
#LearnWithBrainly
