Answer:This is what I know
Explanation:
Laws are never respected nor unforced in India. Indians follow all rules and laws when they are in a foreign country in the Western world. However, when they are in India, they usually don’t follow Indian laws. There are several reasons for Indians are not following the rules in India like
1: Lenient Laws-The Indian laws are extremely lenient and flexible. Often the penalty for violating the law is so low that it would be profitable to break the law.
2:Poor enforcement-The enforcement of law is quite poor due to shortage of government officials, corruption and slow justice delivery system. Even when a case is booked against the offender, it takes several years for the culprit to bring to justice.
3: Wrong role model-The leaders and top officials in India are often the first people to break the law. They even take pride of doing so. That set a wrong example before the common people in India who follow their footsteps.
I think that bob should get his money back because John had rented the skis without any permission to sell them by the owner. Even if bob and John had made no warranty of any kind he would still need consent from the owner.
As the options are not included with this question, we cannot chose a particular statement. Nevertheless, we are able to explain what the Supreme Court has ruled when it comes to the constitutional requirements of confinement.
The first case that addressed such conditions was that of <em>Holt v. Sarver</em>, in 1970. This was the first in a series of common law cases that found state prison systems to violate the Eighth Amendment. This amendment prohibits the use of cruel and unusual punishment.
This series of cases established that confinement should not include the unnecessary infliction of pain, nor should conditions be grossly disproportionate to the severity of the crime warranting imprisonment. The restrictions placed on prisoners can be restrictive, and even harsh, but should not become cruel. This includes the display of deliberate indifference in emergencies on the part of officials, or malicious and sadistic acts.
