Answer:
in both cases the flyer was presented to the barber before the service was provided.
a) no, because Karl was informed about the mistake and the real price and could then still have decided to take his business elsewhere. but if he then agreed to still have the service performed under the now updated conditions, then that is what the "contract" is basing on.
he has no grounds to claim the other price afterwards.
b) no, because the service provider saw the flyer information, did not object to or correct the information right away, but performed the service instead. now the "contract" is based on that agreement based on the conditions of the flyer.
Answer:
The answer is sadly Donald Trump But I wish the correct answer would be the picture I circled in red
Explanation:
Answer:
The ruling was made by a lower court than the court hearing the current case.
Some of the facts of the original case are significantly different than the current case.
The judge in the original case did not have jurisdiction to try the case.
Explanation:
1, 5,4
Answer:
a) The parties to the contract know too much about their particular interests and as a result, the terms of the contract are not necessarily fair.
Explanation:
Answer:
each year
Explanation:
please mark me as brainliest
