Answer:
legislative makes laws, executive enforces laws, judicial interprets laws
Answer:
A difference between the Texas constitution and the U.S Constitution is that the Texas Constitution is supposed to provide a rigid structure for government, leaving no room for interpretation or whatsoever.
Whereas the US Constitution is what is known as a Case-law Constitution, that is, it is based on judicial interpretation of laws that have been enacted by legislative bodies and governing documents, where the document is meant only to provide a basic structure to the government.
Based on the analysis, Joe did pick Action B ( where Joe has a good time playing ball, he feels guilty about breaking his promise and Kat finds out that Joe lied, and Joe's friendship with her suffers because it is the option that has lesser consequences.
When you look at the situation of Joe in terms of Egoist Analysis, he has the self interest to play ball with his friends and also pick up Kat but also he shifted to the use of utilitarian in basing his judgment.
This is not because of his self interest but because his friend is moving out of town and that would be the last time they ever play together.
He look at the option that has more consequences (collective baseball friends he will disappoint if he did not go) and just one friend who he can see later and explain reasons to.
<h3>What is the role of egoism and utilitarianism?</h3>
The word egoism is known to center around the psychological theory that deals with the nature of human motives.
Psychological egoism is one that state that all behaviors are said to be influenced by self-interest. In other words, it suggests that every That is any action or behavior or decision of all is due to our self interest.
Utilitarianism is known to be a theory that deals with morality. It is one that stands for any actions that result in happiness or pleasure and is one that is against any actions that cause unhappiness or harm.
Learn more about egoist from
brainly.com/question/13721004
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.
Mathieu Joseph Bonaventure Orfila (1787–1853), often called the "Father of Toxicology," was the first great 19th-century exponent of forensic medicine.