https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eMoR7bgpfU4 E Watch the video clip above from the James Bond movie, "Skyfall." In legal terms, James Bond and the other spies work for the British secret intelligence service, known as M16. Think of Mr. Bond and the spies as agents and M16 as the Principal. When is the principal legally liable for the acts and torts committed by its agents? Remember the requirements of Respondeat Superior, including whether the agents are employees or independent contractors. During the car chase scene in the video, Mr. Bond and his spy partner chase a criminal and cause all sorts of damages to the Grand Bazaar in Istanbul, Turkey. They commit many torts against people and property. Fortunately, no one at the Bazaar is killed, that we can tell, so there is mostly property damage, but there must be injuries, and probably emotional distress. Imagine a scenario where the owner(s) of the Grand Bazaar decide to sue M16 in tort for the negligent and intentional acts of M16's agents (James Bond and his partner.) Putting aside the fact that the agents were saving the world and any immunity from lawsuits that may or may not bring, would M16 be legally liable under the law of agency for the damages and torts caused by Mr. Bond and his partner? To answer this question, analyze the case from the points of view of each of the following and make your "ruling" as a group: 1. Attorneys for the Grand Bazaar and its merchants, customers, etc.: List reasons why M16 as the Principal, is legally liable for the torts caused by its secret agents. Use elements from class lecture on Agency. 2. Attorney for M16: Argue why M16 should not be legally liable for the torts committed by Mr. Bond and his partner. Use elements from class to dispute the attorneys for the Grand Bazaar, merchants and customers. 3. Attorneys for Mr. Bond and his partner: Make an argument as to why your clients (Mr. Bond and his partner) did not commit any torts and/or are not directly responsible for the damages or torts from the car chase