Answer:
See explaination
Explanation:
The Issue : Gary being the lessor that leased his commercial property to John to conduct bakery business with an obligation to repair modified or damaged parts if any after lease term. However, John couldnt repair the same but paid $3,100 to Gary to cover the repair expenses.
The Legislation : The required Provision says that lessee is reponsible to keep the premises in good condition and to handover back to the lessor in the same condition as it was in the beginning of the lease period except normal wear and tear. Here damage to the building was not due to passage of time or Act of God . It was due to installation of Machinery and fixtures in the building by the lessee.
According to Polster, Inc. v. Swing, tenant was reponsible to repair the damage to the drop ceiling, ceiling tiles, interior walls, front door sill and jamb as it was not normal wear and tear.
Also in the case of Churchill Forge, Inc. v. Brown, there is no unjust in requiring a tenant to reimburse the expenses to landlord. As a result cost will shift to the tenant/lessee as the case may be.
In Conclusion : Thus it is the responsibilty of John to repair the property or else to reimburse the entire expenses incurred to Gary to put the building in good shape other than for normal wear and tear.
Here , the installing of machinery and fixtures should be considered as capital expenditure as lonterm benefit is determined. However, repairs at the end of the lease period will be categorised as revenue expenditure and considered in Profit & loss account for the purpose of tax.
Smooth like butter, like a criminal undercover
Gon' pop like trouble breaking into your heart like that
Answer:
Geologists use the following tests to distinguish minerals and the rocks they make: hardness, color, streak, luster, cleavage and chemical reaction. A scratch test developed by a German mineralogist Friedrich Mohs in 1822 is used to determine mineral hardness.
Answer:
<h3>Plessy v. Ferguson case.</h3>
Explanation:
- The Plessy v. Ferguson case of 1896 ruled out that segregation was constitutional as long as both blacks and whites enjoyed opportunities that were separate but equal.
- However, the Supreme Court's verdict in the Plessy v. Ferguson case of 1896 was challenged by Justice Earl Warren stating that the idea of ‘separate but equal’ in public school was unconstitutional and inherently unequal.
- Thus, Chief Justice Earl Warren issued the Supreme Court’s unanimous decision in Brown v. Board of Education, ruling that racial segregation in public schools violated the "Equal Protection Clause” of the 14th Amendment.
See? i am not sure if it’s right, sorry if it is not!!!
