Business, 21.03.2020 11:12 ashleypere99

AAA and XXX companies are both major international conglomerates. They are negotiating a contract whereby AAA will install a computer system for XXX. One clause in the contract states that AAA will not be liable for damages caused by the negligent installation of the computer system, except that AAA warrants the system and will fix any problem for a period of two years following installation. AAA completes the installation of the computer system. XXX loads extensive amounts of information on the system, but all of it is destroyed because AAA negligently installed the memory chips. AAA fixes the memory, but XXX incurred significant expenses in recreating the lost information. XXX sues for these expenses and AAA defends with the noted clause in the contract. Who wins?
A) XXX wins; these types of clauses are never enforceable.
B) XXX wins; exculpatory clauses are usually valid, but this one would not be valid since it attempts to relieve AAA of liability for negligent behavior.
C) XXX wins; this exculpatory clause is not valid because it is unconscionable.
D) AAA wins; this exculpatory clause is most likely enforceable.

Answers: 3

Show answers

Other questions on the subject: Business

Business, 21.06.2019 18:20, haza1873

Amathematical approximation called the rule of 70 tells us that the number of years that it will take something that is growing to double in size is approximately equal to the number 70 divided by its percentage rate of growth. thus, if mexico's real gdp per person is growing at 7 percent per year, it will take about 10 years(=70/7) to double. apply the rule of 70 to solve the following problem. real gdp per person in mexico in 2005 was about $11,000 per person, while it was about $44,000 per person in the u. s. if real gdp per person in mexico grows at the rate of 5 percent per year: how long will it take mexico's real gdp per person to reach the level that the united states was at in 2005? (hint: how many times would mexico's 2005 real gdp per person have to double to reach the u. s.'s 2005 real gdp per person?

Answers: 3

continue

Business, 22.06.2019 13:10, Hannahdavy5434

Thomas kratzer is the purchasing manager for the headquarters of a large insurance company chain with a central inventory operation. thomas's fastest-moving inventory item has a demand of 6,000 units per year. the cost of each unit is $100, and the inventory carrying cost is $10 per unit per year. the average ordering cost is $30 per order. it takes about 5 days for an order to arrive, and the demand for 1 week is 120 units. (this is a corporate operation, and the are 250 working days per year.)a) what is the eoq? b) what is the average inventory if the eoq is used? c) what is the optimal number of orders per year? d) what is the optimal number of days in between any two orders? e) what is the annual cost of ordering and holding inventory? f) what is the total annual inventory cost, including cost of the 6,000 units?

Answers: 3

continue

Business, 22.06.2019 19:30, janayshas84

Anew firm is developing its business plan. it will require $615,000 of assets, and it projects $450,000 of sales and $355,000 of operating costs for the first year. management is reasonably sure of these numbers because of contracts with its customers and suppliers. it can borrow at a rate of 7.5%, but the bank requires it to have a tie of at least 4.0, and if the tie falls below this level the bank will call in the loan and the firm will go bankrupt. what is the maximum debt ratio the firm can use? (hint: find the maximum dollars of interest, then the debt that produces that interest, and then the related debt ratio.)a. 41.94%b. 44.15%c. 46.47%d. 48.92%e. 51.49%

Answers: 3

continue

Business, 23.06.2019 15:00, Osorio5116

How should the environmental effects be dealt with when evaluating this project? the environmental effects should be ignored since the plant is legal without mitigation. the environmental effects should be treated as a sunk cost and therefore ignored. if the utility mitigates for the environmental effects, the project is not acceptable. however, before the company chooses to do the project without mitigation, it needs to make sure that any costs of "ill will" for not mitigating for the environmental effects have been considered in the original analysis. the environmental effects should be treated as a remote possibility and should only be considered at the time in which they actually occur. the environmental effects if not mitigated would result in additional cash flows. therefore, since the plant is legal without mitigation, there are no benefits to performing a "no mitigation" analysis.

Answers: 1

continue

You know the right answer?

AAA and XXX companies are both major international conglomerates. They are negotiating a contract wh...