Answer:
What exactly is the question here. I'm kind of confused. But will be happy to help you if you further elaborate. :]
Explanation:
Answer:
"Friends of Puyallup"
Explanation:
https://www.change.org/p/stop-the-7-mega-warehouse-proposal-in-the-puyallup-shaw-pioneer-farmland-area/u/25202253
Answer:
Explanation:
The National Police Commission abbreviated as NAPOLCOM, is an attached agency of the Department of the Interior and Local Government responsible for the administration and control of the Philippine National Police (PNP).6975 and 8551 to administer and control the Philippine National Police, the DILG “ for the purpose of effectively discharging the functions prescribe in the "To exercise administrative control and operational supervision over the PNP.
plz mark as brainliest
The factor should a plaintiff consider when deciding which interference tort applies to a situation is that
- The plaintiff must a contract that is with a third party;
- The defendant must know about the contract at the time of the alleged interference
- The defendant must have interfered intentionallly and the interference was not right
- The actions of defendant’s led to a breach of the contract
- The plaintiff has suffered some measure of damage as a result
- The defendant knew a contract between the plaintiff and a third party existed.
For better understanding let's explain what tort interference means
- There are two types of tortious interference
- Tortious interference with contract
- Tortious interference with good economic advantage.
- Tort interference is regarded as an issue where one party was involved in something or does a thing to intentionally disregard another party’s business transactions or project
From the above we can therefore say that the answer the factors should a plaintiff consider when deciding which interference tort applies to a situation is that:
- The plaintiff must a contract that is with a third party;
- The defendant must know about the contract at the time of the alleged interference
- The defendant must have interfered intentionallly and the interference was not right
- The actions of defendant’s led to a breach of the contract
- The plaintiff has suffered some measure of damage as a result
- The defendant knew a contract between the plaintiff and a third party existed is correct
Learn more Tort interference from:
brainly.com/question/15058912
Answer:
Yes
Explanation:
While they're not required to, many major credit card issuers provide zero-liability fraud protection. ... Once you report that your card is lost or stolen or that someone has used it fraudulently, credit card issuers typically cancel your existing card and issue a new one with a different number.
