legal issues, the rules of law and the resolution of the dispute
Answer as you would case problems on an exam in class. Discuss the legal issues, the rules of law and the resolution of the dispute. You may consult the textbook.
Textbook: International Business Law, Schaffer 8th edition.
Writing assignments will be graded on the depth of the arguments, the analysis, coherence, and editing (grammar and mechanical correctness).
1. The government of South Africa entered into a contract with Lone Star Corp., a Texas corporation, to design, construct, and install a ventilation system for use in their national mines. Lone Star, in turn, contracted with Werke, a German company, to design and build the exhaust system. Werke subcontracted the actual exhaust system construction to Air Systems, a Pennsylvania corporation. A clause in the Lone Star- Werke contract stated that in the event either should sue, "…it is agreed that the place to litigate shall be the civil court in Berlin, Germany."
Later, South Africa, unhappy with the exhaust system, sued Lone Sta in a U.S. court to recover damages. Lone Star then submitted a complaint against Werke in the same U.S. court, essentially asking for reimbursement from Werke. Werke moved to dismiss the complaint on the grounds that the court did not have jurisdiction and that under the forum-selection clause in the Lone Star- Werke contract, the dispute should be heard in the Germans courts. Lone Star contended that there was jurisdiction and that the clause should not be upheld. Discuss fully two issues- whether or not the U.S. court has jurisdiction over Werke and whether or not the court should uphold the forum-selection clause.
Chapter 8, page 272, question 7: price support for potatoes. Was the executive branch’s agreement constitutionally valid?
You may recall this transcation. On May 14, 2012 Arctic Appliances and Sun Mi, Inc. enter into a C.I.F. Lon Rie( a country in Southeast Asia) contract for the sale of 1000 refrigerators at a price of $623 each with payment to be made by letter of credit, choice of Lon Rie law and a delivery date of August 10, 2012. Arctic Appliances contracts with a carrier, World Transit, to ship the goods on June, 28, 2012 from the port of Philadelphia through the Panama Canal to Lon Rie. The refrigerators, packed eight to a pallet, are loaded onto the S.S. Titan on June 27, 2012 and the carrier issues a clean, on-board bill of lading for 1000 refrigerators shipped on 125 pallets marked Arctic Appliances Deluxe refrigerators.
The Titan sails for the Panama Canal on June 28. On the fourth day, as the Titan approaches the Canal, terrorists detonate bombs causing such extensive damage that the Canal is not navigable. Reports indicate that the Canal should reopen within a week. Rather than make the lenghty and dangerous trip around Cape Horn, the Titan decides to wait in the Caribbean until the Canal is reopened. By July 12, it is clear that the canal will not reopen until late July. On July 15, the Titan sets sail for Cape Horn. The ship encounters winter storms around the cape, hits a small iceberg and takes on some water. The damage is minor and after a slight delay the Titan continues on its journey. The ship arrives in Lon Rie on August 15, 2012.
Sun Mi eagerly awaits the goods because on July 5, 2012, it entered into a contract with Somtu for the sale of 50 refrigerators with delivery set for August 12, 2012. When Sun Mi surrenders the bill of lading, it receives 124 pallets of refrigerators, 10 of those pallets are water damaged.
Because of the missing refrigerators and water damage to 80 refrigerators after loading onto the ship, Sun Mi tried to recover the $54,824 value of the destroyed refrigerators from the carrier, Titan. Titan denied responsability for the loss and argued that even if it were liable, the law does not obligate it to pay $54,824 for the loss. Decide, thoroughly discussing the arguments of both parties.
Fleur, a french company, promised to buy 15,000 gallons of maple syrup from Quebec Entreprises, Ltd., in Canada under a C.I.F. Le Havre, France contract. Payment was to be made by an irrevocable, confirmed letter of credit upon delivery of a clean, on board bill of lading, a certificate of inspection and all the usual export documents. Quebec Entreprises delivered the required documents to the confirming bank in Montreal, Quebec. The inspection certificate stated that "based on a sample taken fron five gallons, the maple syrup is of the kind ordered." The bill of lading had a notation on it that the goods had been partially destroyed by water leakage after they were loaded on board the ship. Should the confirming bank pay the seller on the letter of credit? Could the bank successfully argue that the certificate, on its face, was insufficient to certify the entire order?
Discuss fully the most important, valuable or suprising concept you learned about international business law this term.
We went through chapter 1 to chapter 8 in class this term from the textbook
PLACE THIS ORDER OR A SIMILAR ORDER WITH US TODAY AND GET AN AMAZING DISCOUNT 🙂