Courts in the 17th and 18th century were far less willing than they are today to interfere with a bargain struck by two parties.There were a number of reasons for this.Which of the following is least likely to have been one of them?
A) The courts were not aware that this approach frequently led to injustice in particular cases.
B) With fewer laws to regulate behaviour in those times, there was little but the contract from which they could draw guidance as to how to resolve a dispute.
C) There was a real risk of social conflict and chaos if citizens, and the courts, could not be relied upon to uphold bargains.
D) Contract terms in that era were more likely than in modern times to be individually negotiated and, in that sense, consumers had a more real chance of being able to protect their own interests.
Correct Answer:
Verified
Q12: Which of the following ideas or facts
Q13: Which of the following requirements does not
Q14: The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC)
Q15: Most of the rules regulating marketing and
Q16: Caveat emptor is a Latin maxim meaning:
A)let
Q18: The Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (Cth)
Q19: Section 18 of the Australian Consumer Law
Q20: Which of the following is not required
Q21: Which of the following is most likely
Q22: Which of the following is most likely
Unlock this Answer For Free Now!
View this answer and more for free by performing one of the following actions
Scan the QR code to install the App and get 2 free unlocks
Unlock quizzes for free by uploading documents