States Sue Trump Administration Over SNAP Restrictions for Legal Immigrants 
Asian Markets Mixed as RBI Cuts Rates and BOJ Signals Possible Hike 
IMF Deputy Dan Katz Visits China as Key Economic Review Nears 
Gold Prices Edge Higher as Markets Await Key U.S. PCE Inflation Data 
Airbus Faces Pressure After November Deliveries Dip Amid Industrial Setback 
Asia’s IPO Market Set for Strong Growth as China and India Drive Investor Diversification 
European Stocks Rise as Markets Await Key U.S. Inflation Data 
Michael Dell Pledges $6.25 Billion to Boost Children’s Investment Accounts Under Trump Initiative 
Amazon Italy Pays €180M in Compensation as Delivery Staff Probe Ends 
China Urged to Prioritize Economy Over Territorial Ambitions, Says Taiwan’s President Lai 
Magnum Audit Flags Governance Issues at Ben & Jerry’s Foundation Ahead of Spin-Off 
Trump Vows Pardon for Former Honduran President as Honduras Faces Tight Election 
Momenta Quietly Moves Toward Hong Kong IPO Amid Rising China-U.S. Tensions 
Brazil’s Supreme Court Orders Jair Bolsonaro to Begin 27-Year Prison Term 
GM Issues Recall for 2026 Chevrolet Silverado Trucks Over Missing Owner Manuals 
CFPB Reaches $1.75 Million Settlement with MoneyLion Over Military Loan Overcharges 
RBI Cuts Repo Rate to 5.25% as Inflation Cools and Growth Outlook Strengthens 
The Seoul Central District Court ruled against customers who filed a lawsuit against the local unit of U.S. electric vehicle maker Tesla Inc., demanding reparations of 10 million won per person.
The plaintiffs claim that they incurred losses as Tesla did not inform them that there would soon be a specifications upgrade at the time of their purchase.
The customers insist that Tesla's specifications upgrade was equivalent to the release of a new car and that the company should have notified them of such a plan.
The customers bought Tesla EVs in March 2019, a month before the carmaker announced the specifications upgrade.
The court, however, ruled that there was no evidence that Tesla explicitly said that it would not be releasing a new car.
The court added that the cars purchased had long been in the market, and there was media and consumer speculation of an upgrade in the works.
