Based on Canadian law, give correct answers and explanations please.

After the safe debacle was over and the wall was torn down, Joyce and Jim decided the house needed a fresh coat of paint. The house was too big to paint it by themselves, and they were still tired from the renovation, so they put out an ad hoping to hire someone. The ad read: "Hiring painters for large house. Indoor only. Flat rate of $750 total for one day (9-5pm), regardless of number of people. Just show up at 511 Imagination Lane at 9:00am on August 6, 2022. Must bring own supplies, including 3 gallons of flat eggshell." Mikel recently started saving for college. He knows his way around a paintbrush and he lives just down the road from Joyce and Jim's posted address, so he rushes to the hardware store to buy the supplies. Yikes! The supplies alone cost him $325. He shows up at Joyce and Jim's house on August 6 at 9:00am, ready to paint. He didn't text or call in advance. When he knocks on the door, Jim answers and tells him that they decided not to paint after all, because their landlord said they weren't allowed. With the above facts in mind, answer the following: Question 16 (1 point) Advertisements are usually considered invitations to treat, not offers. True or false? Question 17 (1 point) Would Joyce and Jim's ad be considered an offer? 0 a) No, the advertisement was not specific enough so it will likely be considered merely an invitation to treat 0 b) Yes, all advertisements are offers 0 c) No, the advertisement didn't list the postal code so it can't be an offer 0 d) Yes, the advertisement was specific enough that it would likely be considered an offer Question 18 (1 point) For this question only, assume that there was a binding contract. What remedy would Mikel most likely be granted? O a) Damages of $750 0 b) Damages of $1075 0 c) Damages of $425 0 d) Damages of $475 Question 19 (1 point) For this question only, assume this ad is an offer. What would happen if 10 people showed up individually, ready to paint, on August 6 at 9:00am? 0 a) Nothing, this was merely an invitation to treat 0 b) Each person would be paid $750 0 c) The $750 would be divided evenly amongst the 10 people Q d) The $750 would go to the first person to arrive Question 20 (1 point) Why might this be considered a unilateral contract? O a) Because acceptance and performance of the offer happen simultaneously O b) Because acceptance and performance of the offer happen by the same person 0 c) Because it is likely that only one person would carry out the contract 0 d) It wouldn't be because there was probably no offer Question 21 (1 point) Mikel was very upset about the whole situation. He's just turned 18 and now he can't afford to go to college. He has no prior criminal record, but he's devastated that he can't afford school. He called Jim 3 lot of names and told him that they should head down the road to the abandoned cabin and "settle this". He said to Jim, "you know what I mean." Jim had a bit of a temper (he's been charged with assault twice before, and the second time he served 18 months in jail) and didn't take kindly to Mikel challenging him. Besides, the whole thing was Karen's fault anyway since she said Jim and Joyce couldn't paint. Fed up, Jim heads down to the cabin to meet Mikel. When he gets there, Mikel tries to swing his paint roller at Jim, but he misses. Jim shoves Mikel to the ground, badly injuring Mikel's knee. Mikel swings again at Jim's knee, this time hitting Jim and causing Jim to stumble off the porch. Jim hits his head on a nearby rock. Two months pass. Jim is recovering, but not very well. He decides to call the police and report the fight. With the above facts in mind, answer the following: What are the police likely to charge Mikel with? O a) Domestic Violence O b) Nothing, he is innocent O c) Battery Q d) Assault Question 22 (1 point) Could the police charge Jim with assault? 0 a) No, he was the victim O b) No, Mikel swung first so only Mikel can be charged 0 c) No, Mikel recovered quicker than Jim so Jim can't be charged 0 d) Yes, he also injured Mikel Question 23 (1 point) Could the Crown choose to proceed summarily in either case? 0 a) No, summary charges must be brought within 7 days 0 b) Yes, assault is always a summary offence O c) Yes, less than 12 months have passed since the date of the offence Q d) No, assault is always an indictable offence Question 24 (1 point) For this question only assume that Mikel is convicted of a summary offence. Which of the following is true? O a) He would likely face a life sentence 0 b) His case would have to be heard in the Federal Court of Canada 0 c) He would never be allowed to appeal 0 d) He will likely face a fine up to $5000 and/or two years less a day imprisonment Question 25 (1 point) True or false: If the Crown proceeds with charges against either Jim or Mikel, neither Jim or Mikel could sue the other in civil court for their injuries. Question 26 (1 point) If Jim is charged with assault, what is the applicable standard of proof which the Crown must meet: 0 a) On a balance of likelihood O b) On a balance of probabilities O c) Beyond a reasonable doubt Q d) Beyond a suspicion of truth Question 27 (1 point) If the Crown pursues charges against Mikel, which of the following is true about the Crown's case against Mikel? (a) The Crown must prove the actus reus (guilty act) and mens rea (guilty mind) of the case beyond a reasonable doubt Ob) The Crown must prove the actus reus (guilty act) and mens rea (guilty mind) of the case on a balance of probabilities O c) The Crown must prove the actus reus (guilty act), mens rea (guilty mind), and cogitationeus (guilty thought) of the case beyond a reasonable doubt O d) The Crown must prove the actus reus (guilty act), mens rea (guilty mind), and cogitation reus (guilty thought) of the case on a balance of probabilitiesQuestion 28 (8 points) You are the Crown Prosecutor. You must decide whether to pursue charges against Jim or Mikel or both. Who will you pursue charges against? Explain whether you chose to pursue charges for each Jim and Mikel and explain why or why not. For any person against whom you pursue charges, you must decide whether to proceed summarily or by indictment. What factors led you to this decision? For each question asked, you must choose a firm position. Support your position with appropriate reference to course materials. Paragraph