Case Study: 2 PART - A (5 Marks) A prominent automobile company suffered a significant water event at a parts warehouse when a fire sprinkler malfunctioned in the middle of the night, damaging OMR 150,000 worth of parts. The alarm system failed to notify the monitoring company of the mishap, and an on-site security company failed to notice water coming out the front door during routine overnight inspections. Investigation ascertained the sprinkler system had a fault which was on recall, that the recalled item had been replaced within days of the loss, and that the replaced part was also defective and failed. The Safeguard insurance company assessed the loss and paid the company in question OMR 150,000 as indemnity. Moreover, the automobile company took up the matter against the sprinkler manufacturer with the Court of Law, and the court-ordered to pay the automobile company a sum of OMR 150,000. This was in addition to the compensation received from the insurer During the investigation, causes of the damage were attributed to a faulty sprinkler system and the irresponsibility on part of the on-site security company.' You are required to: a) Identify the parties involved in the case. (50 words minimum/1 Mark) b) Examine and explain which principles of insurance apply to the above scenario? (150 words minimum/ 2 Marks) c) Critically evaluate the sequence of events in the case and identify if any of the insurance principles have been violated. (100 words minimum/2 Marks)