Answer-GeekTweak
B
Explanation:
One of the most famous strategies would be to put pressure on the civilians, threaten their lives and even take them to the brink of death. This manly works only solely why is that the government doesn't want to lose the citizens that put their heart and flesh for the countries they live in to perish in such a brute way. It's not how humans should spend their last moments on this beautiful planet.
It should be: Command of the Armed Forces is the right answer
The burden and standard of proof mandates which party is responsible for convincing the courts and to what extent that party needs to justify their claims. Preponderance of evidence is one of these legal standards of proof.
Answer:
A proposal is subject to its acceptance by an offeree. An acceptance can be of three types given as under :-
A. Conditional Acceptance.
B. Express Acceptance.
C. Implied Acceptance.
In the above mentioned offer, Allan has given a conditional acceptance to dany about his willingness to accept the order in a safe and sound condition and thereby making a counteroffer to Dany. Dany after his consent to do so can enter into a contact. This is to be called as qualified acceptance
Explanation:
A proposal is subject to its acceptance by an offeree. An acceptance can be of three types given as under :-
A. Conditional Acceptance.
B. Express Acceptance.
C. Implied Acceptance.
In the above mentioned offer, Allan has given a conditional acceptance to dany about his willingness to accept the order in a safe and sound condition and thereby making a counteroffer to Dany. Dany after his consent to do so can enter into a contact. This is to be called as qualified acceptance
Answer:
Tort.
Explanation:
There are no facts given that would suggest a breach of contract (though with certain facts, that could be the case).
With facts given, this would be a Tort, defined as "a wrongful act or an infringement of a right (other than under contract) leading to civil legal liability."
The former business partner, if the allegations are found true, is in violation of intellectual property laws, theft and possibly other legal theories which may be applicable given additional facts.
There is no discussion of a contract; this is not a criminal offense; and there is no evidence of a prior judgment to be adjudicated.