Go through all case study and give well detailed answers with appropriate references. Answer all questions.

:Richard has a specialist car dealership. He buys old cars, refurbishes them and then sells them. He also hires out cars.

Richard is restoring an old jeep. It requires a special type of shock-absorber to enable it to travel over rough ground. Richard phones Shocks Are Us. He says to Emma, the manager: "I need four shock absorbers which can be used for off-road driving" Emma consults a brochure published by the shock absorber manufacturer and "Says the D200 shock absorber can be used for off-road driving.". Richard then agrees to buy four D200 shock absorbers for $ 120 each. When he installs them on the jeep and takes it for a test drive over rough country, the shock absorbers give way and the jeep crashes down, causing $ 2 000 worth of damage to its body. It turns out that when Emma gave Richard the information over the phone, she had been looking at the wrong page of the brochure. Had she looked at the correct page, she would have seen that the D200 is not suitable for off-road driving.

Richard operates his business from a premises which he has leased from George for $ 5 000 per month since January 2016. The lease specifies that the rent is to be paid to George every six months and that it will increase every year by 10%. Richard pays George $ 30 000 in June 2016 and December 2016, but then tells George that he is having financial difficulties and needs every dollar he can to buy equipment. George says "OK, I will let you off paying the increase this year". Richard is pleased with this, and uses the money he would have had to spend on the rent increase to buy new tools. In June 2017, Richard pays $ 30 000 to George, but George contacts him demanding an additional $ 3 000. When Richard refers to their earlier conversation, George says "Whatever I said, the lease you signed specifies that the rent will go up by 10% each year".

Tom is a collector of vintage cars. He sees that Richard has a 1979 Mercedes 450SEL for sale on his website, priced at $ 20 000. Tom sends Richard an email saying "I offer to buy the 1979 Mercedes 450SEL for $ 18 500". Richard sends an email back saying "Sorry, that is not enough, but I will sell it to you for $ 19 000". Tom sends an email back saying "No, I can't pay that". Richard then sends an email saying "OK, I accept your original offer of $ 18 500", but when he brings the car to Tom's house, Tom refuses to accept it or to pay the money.

When Richard goes on holiday, Martin looks after his car lot. Martin doesn't have a car. However, a friend of Martin's is about to visit town and he wants to be able to drive her around. Martin goes to Richard and says "Can I hire one of your cars?" Richard says "The usual price is $ 50 per day, but because you looked after my car lot in August, you can hire it at no cost. You can pick it up on Monday". Martin is very pleased and readily agrees, but when he comes to pick up the car, Richard says that he has hired it out to a customer. Martin says that Richard has breached their agreement.

Advise Richard of his legal position in relation to each of these four scenarios. You should assume that all facts given would be provable if the matters came to court. You should also assume that when any of the people mentioned conduct business, they do so as sole traders, not through corporations.

Partan is a quoted company. The directors have asked for a report on the company's cost of capital. The following information has been provided: . The market capitalisation of the company's equity is $600 million. The company has debentures with a face value of 250 million. Their market value is f220 million. The corporation tax rate is 23%. . The risk-free rate of interest is 4% per annum. . The ungeared beta on Partan's equity is 1.3. The debentures have a coupon rate of 5% and are redeemable at par in five years' time. . The market rate of return is 9% p.a. The directors have already calculated Partan's weighted average cost of capital (WACC), but they wish you to prepare a calculation in order to confirm their figures. They are concerned that the WACC is higher than they think is justified and they wish to discuss some proposals for reducing the figure because the directors plan to raise further finance in order to fund expansion, but they are unwilling to do so if the cost of capital is overstated. (i) Determine Partan's cost of equity using the company's geared beta. [4] (ii) Determine Partan's approximate cost of debt. [4] (iii) Calculate Partan's WACC. [2] The marketing director has suggested that the company could dramatically reduce the cost of capital if the board promotes the company in the same way that it promotes its products. The directors should identify the market's needs and explain to those who provide finance just how well suited Partan is to meeting those needs. (iv) Discuss the logic of the marketing director's proposal for reducing the WACC. [10] [Total 20]Tyco International, a manufacturing company, sued its former CEO, Dennis Kozlowski, in regard to his receipt of unauthorized bonuses from the company profits. Among his other wrongdoings, Kozlowski awarded unauthorized special bonuses to himself and more than 40 other Tyco employees. In sum, he misappropriated from company funds over $100 mil- lion that he was not authorized to receive. Included in this misappropriation was the use of company funds for personal expenditures, such as $18 million to buy and redecorate his New York City apartment and $1 million for his wife's 40th birthday party, held on the Italian island of Sardinia. The extravagant party featured an ice sculpture of the statue of David uri- nating Stolichnaya vodka. Based on these and other corporate misdeeds in related criminal proceedings, Kozlowski is currently serving 8.33 to 25 years at the Mid-State Correctional Facility in New York. How do you think Kozlowski would have acted had he considered the public disclosure test before engaging in these corporate misdeeds? What if he applied theJarold Daniel Friedman worked as a temporary com- puter contractor for a pharmaceutical warehouse. The warehouse offered him a permanent position, but the warehouse required that he get a mumps vac- cine, grown in chicken embryos, as a condition of his e permanent employment. Friedman, a vegan, believed r that the vaccination would violate his religious beliefs f and declined to be vaccinated. As a result, the ware- a house withdrew its offer of employment. Friedman n claimed that the warehouse discriminated against him on the basis of religion. Do you agree with Friedman? C Do employers have a duty to respect the beliefs of their employees? If so, what happens when that duty conflicts with employers' duty to provide a safe and C healthy work environment? [ Friedman v. Southern