Square owns an online business selling sports attire. Since the outbreak of the Covid-19 pandemic, his online business flourished. He received many orders from customers who prefer to purchase on-line due to the Movement Control Order. He was not able to handle his business alone and decided to seek assistance from his nephew, Triangle, who was waiting for his SPM result. One day, Square was not feeling well and went for a Covid-19 swab test. The result was positive, and he must be admitted into hospital. He made a written announcement, 'Dear Customer, please deal with my partner, Triangle (WhatsApp: 0124317751) for all orders.' One customer, Round, placed his order for 100 Zumba shirts worth RM3000. Round texted Triangle and Triangle asked him to transfer the payment to his account. Triangle gave his personal account. Upon receiving payment from Round, Triangle used the money to purchase his favourite online games. When Round asked about his orders, Triangle blocked him. Round contacted Square and demanded for refund. Square refused to refund and claimed that he was not liable for Triangle's conduct and he did not officially appoint Triangle as his qualified agent. After recovering from his illness, Square found that his sport attire's business had deteriorated as most of the sport activities are non-social distancing and prohibited by the government. Square wanted to venture into another business, that is selling face mask and sanitizer online. He appointed Hexagon, as his business consultant to find a good brand. Hexagon suggested the face mask of 'Medisos' brand and advised that there are no other local online shops selling this brand of face mask. Square agreed and launched his new business. After one (1) week, he discovered that there were other local online shops which were selling the same brand. Square was very frustrated as he had invested a huge amount of money in this business. He decided to take a legal action against Hexagon. At the same time, Square asked another consultant, Rectangle, to find a contractor to renovate his business store. He told Rectangle that his budget was around RM20,000. Rectangle promised to find a good contractor within Square's budget. He offered his friend, Long, a contractor, to do the renovation and Long agreed. However, Rectangle informed Square that the renovation cost was RM40, 000. Square refused as it was beyond his estimation, but subsequently agreed after listening to Square's explanation that other contractors wanted RM50, 000 and the cheapest was from Long. The cost of renovation was only RM20, 000 and Rectangle arranged the balance of RM20, 000 was to be divided between him and Long. After completing the renovation and payment was credited, Square discovered that the actual cost was only RM20, 000. In another incident, Square had appointed a new worker, Octagon. Octagon's duty is to deliver the customer's orders. One of his customers, Diamond, was not satisfied with the quality of the goods delivered and wanted to file a suit against Square. Square asked Octagon to warn Diamond not to proceed with his claim. Square had also promised to indemnify Octagon against any possible consequences of his act. Octagon then threatened Diamond to kill him if he proceeds with his claim. Diamond suffered heart attack and had to be hospitalised. Diamond had filed an action for damages against Octagon. Square panicked and feared he would be implicated. Nasihatkan Square. Sokong jawapan anda dengan seksyen-seksyen dan kes-kes yang berkaitan. Advise Square. Support your answer with relevant sections and case law.