The contract between Sarah and the supplier can be subsequently ratified by Weave Ltd. Is this statement true or false?

In this scenario, the statement can be interpreted in the context of agency law and the concept of ratification. When a contract is made by an agent on behalf of a principal, that principal has the option to ratify (approve) the contract after it has been made. However, for ratification to occur, certain conditions must be met.

If Weave Ltd. is the principal and Sarah is the agent acting on its behalf, then the contract made with the supplier can indeed be ratified by Weave Ltd., provided that Sarah had authority to enter into such a contract. If she lacked the authority or acted outside her contractual limits, then Weave Ltd. cannot subsequently ratify the contract.

The statement indicates that the contract can be ratified by Weave Ltd. If the assertion in the answer indicates it is false, this suggests that there may be a situation where Sarah did not have the authority to negotiate the contract, or that the circumstances under which the contract was formed do not allow for ratification by Weave Ltd.

Thus, understanding the principles of agency and the specific authority Sarah may have possessed in relation to Weave Ltd. is critical in determining the truth of the statement. Hence, ratification is contingent on the authority