Business Law

Assignment Number 2CASE NUMBER 1-Roberts Ltd . v . Ontario Development CorporationQuestionsThe well-grounded basis of the train against the Ontario Development Corporation was that the corporation was at long last responsible for the payment to Roberts , and that in non paid Roberts , Ontario in fact is guilty of breach of contractRoberts would let to examine in the suit against Ontario that Ontario was aware of the fact that all of the contractual requirements were not in place to legitimately provide the monetary resource on the behalf of Sollinger , and br that Ontario moved ahead and falsely correspond that it was legitimately ready , willing and able to release funds to Roberts without confine . It is not a stretch to say that in this slur , if it could be proven that Ontario was aware that it was not in a positio n to release funds it was guilty of fraudIn establishing its claim against Ontario , Roberts would have to prove several elements : first , that Ontario took sole obligation for the payment of the debt when it do the commitment to represent Sollinger s interests , second , that fashioning that delegation in the abounding knowledge that the loan was not nevertheless finalized makes Ontario liable for the debt from the view destine that the business arrangement was make to a lower place false pretenses , and finally that Ontario made commitments on behalf of Sollinger , in the full knowledge that at that point , Sollinger had not fulfilled pick out requirements , i .e . the closedown of certain loan documentsCASE NUMBER...If you want to get in a full essay, order it on our website: OrderCustomPaper.com

If you want to get a full essay, visit our page: write my paper