Answer:
Option B- He acted in good faith.
Step-by-step explanation:
The person who is trading with the other party owes the duty of care which is well stated in the negligence act. However in this case we saw that though the law was unclear but still the CEO acted in best interest of the public at large by consulting the attorney to shed light on the issue. Remember law is ethically minimum that is desired but in this situation the CEO was committed to comply with law that's why he consulted attorney. So saying that he acted in good faith is the best defense in the court.