Hello dear law experts, thank you and please ASAP assist in answering to the case study attached below...

(No reference it's made up)

** NEED TO ANALYZE CASE THROUGH THE USE FOCUS OF ANY OF THESE TOPICS THATMAKE THE MOST SENSE AND APPLY PROPER LAW RULES / STEPS BASED ON THE APPLICATION;

- Misrepresentation and terms

- Discharge of contracts

- *Law of agency

- *Business organizations

- *Real property law

Please apply case study like such;

- Look how question ends

- Take / state the facts to the question AND APPLY EACH STEP of the law TEST and almost reach mini conclusions

- Applications to see if we have a statement of fact, is it false, induce the deal? And is it material??

- IS each step of the test if it is made out?

_________________________________________________

CASE STUDY STARTS BELOW:

Kia and Amy were unit owners in the "Prospect Tower", a stratified building in seattle, consisting of 95-unit owners. KIA AND AMY owned Unit #43, a 700 square foot strata unit on the 10th floor with neighbours directly above and below them. During the pandemic, KIA AND AMY had developed a keen enthusiasm for weight-lifting; as a result, both had gotten themselves into peak physical shape. Unfortunately, portions of their new weight-training regimen also landed them in hot water with their neighbours. Directly below Unit #43 lived Mr. P, who was retired and spent most of his time at home. While he could occasionally hear KIA AND AMY walking around, during their fitness routines, he could hear massive thumps caused by the two dropping weights down on their matted floor. The sound of the weights on the ground was jarring and scary and so, Mr. P complained to his strata council. After receiving the complaint, the Strata President, Anton, went up to kia and amys unit and listened to them secretly from the hallway. During one of kia and amys fitness sessions, Anton could hear the weights slamming to the ground. Shortly after, Anton wrote up a notice of infraction letter and slipped it under kia and amys door. The letter stated that KIA and Anton would be required to pay a $50 fine and, "should there be any further noise complaints, the fine will double".

• Kia and amy are upset by the strata's action and feel it is unwarranted. Fully explain and apply the relevant legal test to determine if the Strata's actions were legally permitted. (6 marks)
• This question does not relate to the question facts. Briefly explain what the court's would analysis was in the case - why did the court find in favour of the winning party? (2 marks)