In Royal Bank of Canada v. Holoboff, the Bank sued Holoboff, a minor, who had sold his client card and personal identification number (PIN) to a third party who defrauded the bank. What was the result?
A) Holoboff was found liable for the tort of conspiracy to commit fraud.
B) Holoboff was found liable for breach of contract, despite being a minor.
C) Holoboff was not liable for anything, as minors can never be liable.
D) Holoboff's parents were automatically liable for Holoboff's tort.
E) Holoboff's parents were automatically liable for Holoboff's breach of contract.
Correct Answer:
Verified
Q14: Randy, as his two older brothers before
Q15: When John bought a car from his
Q16: Requirements of a contract include capacity of
Q17: The case of Canadian Imperial Bank of
Q18: In jurisdictions other than British Columbia, which
Q20: Which one of the following correctly indicates
Q21: All of the following contracts would be
Q22: A provision that restricts the seller from
Q23: Which of the following types of contracts
Q24: Which of the following attempts to form
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