標題:
Business Law!
發問:
When people ‘hold’ property for others (i.e. keep someone’s car if they are out of town), they assume the risk if it is damaged or stolen. This liability sometimes amounts to that of an insurer. Why shouldn’t bailee’s be simply subjected to the reasonable person test rather than this higher standard of care?
最佳解答:
其他解答:
Business Law!
發問:
When people ‘hold’ property for others (i.e. keep someone’s car if they are out of town), they assume the risk if it is damaged or stolen. This liability sometimes amounts to that of an insurer. Why shouldn’t bailee’s be simply subjected to the reasonable person test rather than this higher standard of care?
最佳解答:
此文章來自奇摩知識+如有不便請留言告知
It'll occur to another type of 'holding property for other person'.其他解答:
文章標籤
全站熱搜
留言列表
