Answer:
GHB Sdn Bhd and Sandhu
The prospect for Sandhu to recover the extra commission negotiated with Ahmad during golf is very remote.
1. It was made under undue influence, when Ahmad could have lacked the capacity to make a binding contract. In addition, at that time, Sandhu disclosed that the land was being sought after by many other parties as a way of piling unnecessary pressure on Ahmad.
2. There was no intention to create a legal relation because the additional commission represents a counter-offer. Since the earlier offer was fully documented, this additional offer should have also followed the same process if the company intended to be legally bound.
3. There is lack of consideration to back this additional contract. In the first place, the main contract with Sandhu was made in view of his negotiation skills. So what is Sandhu expected to offer the company in exchange for the extra commission? Nothing.
Explanation:
GHB cannot be expected to promise 0.5% extra commission on a deal, which was equivalent to RM2 million, when an already executed contract for 3% commission had been reached. One can also claim that Ahmad, who suffered from occasional dementia, could have made the promise without the intention for it to be binding on his company but as a way of encouraging Sandhu to close the deal in favor of GHB. Was the deal closed because of the extra commission? No.
C is the answer
Reason is because stealing someone's car is stealing their property
Answer:
B. The court is authorized to hear the case and make a ruling after considering the arguments.
Explanation:
The jurisdiction in legal terms refers to the geographical coverage or reach of a case to be tried, heard, and decide on the matter. This means that cases of any legal matter are tried according to their jurisdictional situations.
In cases of a court that has jurisdiction over a legal dispute, the court is at the liberty to hear and decide on the matter. The court can hear the case and make a ruling after all arguments are presented. The jurisdiction allows the court to act on the case as it likes. This means that the court has the right to make any ruling regarding the case as it has jurisdiction over it.
Thus, the correct answer is option B.
Answer:
Forensic animator.
Explanation:
A forensic toxicologist refers to a professional or an expert who is a certified investigator in determining and identifying the presence of hard drugs or poisons in the body by scientifically testing bodily fluids and tissues.
This ultimately implies that, forensic toxicologists are certified professionals (investigators) who are saddled with the responsibility of collecting evidence e.g presence of alcohol, hard drugs, or poisons, after an unfortunate incident such as murder has occurred. This is to determine whether or not the evidence collected at the crime scene, from the victim or suspect are connected to the crime.
Forensic animator: provides digital 3D crime scene reconstructions that can be manipulated to test different theories and sequences of events.
A chain of custody can be defined as a paper trail containing the chronological order of items of evidence and how they have been handled, controlled, transferred, analyzed, and disposed during the investigation of a case.
This ultimately implies that, a chain of custody contains all the details or informations regarding the investigators (people) who handled, controlled, transferred, analyzed, and disposed an evidence in the course of carrying out investigations on a particular case. The most important and significant part of an investigation is the evidence because it helps to unravel the truth and facts relating to a case. Therefore, it is very important and essential to document and maintain a chain of custody so as to preserve the evidence.
