Deal of The Day! Hurry Up, Grab the Special Discount - Save 25% - Ends In 00:00:00 Coupon code: SAVE25
Welcome to Pass4Success

- Free Preparation Discussions

CIMA Exam CIMAPRA17-BA4-1 Topic 4 Question 110 Discussion

Actual exam question for CIMA's CIMAPRA17-BA4-1 exam
Question #: 110
Topic #: 4
[All CIMAPRA17-BA4-1 Questions]

Tee Ltd has contracted to use Vee Ltd's "Grand Hotel" for a business conference. Which of the following would not be regarded as a valid excuse for Vee Ltd for the unavailability of the hotel on the agreed date?

(i) The hotel was closed due to flood damage.

(ii) The hotel was double booked.

(iii) The hotel manager had arranged to have the hotel redecorated; the decorators had failed to complete the work by the agreed date.

Show Suggested Answer Hide Answer
Suggested Answer: C

Contribute your Thoughts:

Maira
5 days ago
The double booking is definitely not a valid excuse. That's just poor management, plain and simple.
upvoted 0 times
...
Beckie
7 days ago
I think the valid excuse would be (ii) and (iii) only because double booking and incomplete redecoration are valid reasons for unavailability.
upvoted 0 times
...
Noah
14 days ago
I disagree, I believe it could also be (iii) only.
upvoted 0 times
...
Pansy
14 days ago
The hotel being closed due to flood damage seems like a valid excuse to me. I mean, who can control Mother Nature, am I right?
upvoted 0 times
...
Phuong
19 days ago
I think the valid excuse would be (i) only.
upvoted 0 times
...

Save Cancel
az-700  pass4success  az-104  200-301  200-201  cissp  350-401  350-201  350-501  350-601  350-801  350-901  az-720  az-305  pl-300  

Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /pass.php:70) in /pass.php on line 77