The contract signed by XYZ Ltd$.$ and Charles provided that the company would receive a licence to use the computer program that Charles was creating, that Charles would complete the program by January $15,2015,$ that Charles would retain copyright, and that Charles would receive $$10,000$ on completion of his work. Two weeks before the due date, Charles told the president of the company that he was not going to complete the program on time. The president said, "Don't worry about it; get it done as soon as you can." Charles was $10$ days late in completing the work. The delay caused the company to lose money, so it sued Charles for damages. On these facts $($which you should assume can be proved$),$ which of the following is false?

The company has the right to sue even though it is not a natural person.

If this case were heard in the B$.$C$.$ Supreme Court, the judge would have to follow a precedent on the point set by the B$.$C$.$ Court of Appeal.

Charles could enter his defence and could also enter a counterclaim if he felt he had an action against the company.

Charles could use equitable $($promissory$)$ estoppel as a defence.

The company doesn't have the right to sue because the law would presume that the parties did not intend to be legally bound.