{"id":6399,"date":"2013-01-14T02:32:21","date_gmt":"2013-01-14T02:32:21","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/lawin.org\/?p=6399"},"modified":"2013-01-14T02:32:21","modified_gmt":"2013-01-14T02:32:21","slug":"list-of-international-business-law-selected-cases-by-subject","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/lawlegal.eu\/list-of-international-business-law-selected-cases-by-subject\/","title":{"rendered":"List of International Business Law Selected Cases, by Subject"},"content":{"rendered":"<h1>List of International Business Law Selected Court Decisions, by Topic in Europe<\/h1>\n<ul>\n<li>Legal Status of Eastern Greenland: Treaties and Conventions (Sources of International Law)<\/li>\n<li>The Asylum Case: Custom (Sources of International Law)<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>D.THE SCOPE OF INTERNATIONAL LAW IN ACTUAL PRACTICE<\/p>\n<p>The Practice in International Tribunals<\/p>\n<p>The Practice in Municipal Courts<\/p>\n<p>Case 1-3. Sei Fjujii v. State<\/p>\n<p>E.INTERNATIONAL PERSONS<\/p>\n<p>States<\/p>\n<p>Case 1-4. Matimak Trading Co. v. Khalily and D.A.Y. Kids Sportswear Inc.<\/p>\n<p>Case 1-5. The Trail Smelter Arbitration<\/p>\n<p>Case 1-6. Arab Republic of Syria v. Arab Republic of Egypt<\/p>\n<p>International Organizations<\/p>\n<p>Case 1-7. Arab Monetary Fund v. Hashim and Others (No. 3)<\/p>\n<p>Case 1-8. Eunomia di Porro &amp; Co. v. Italian Ministry of Public Education<\/p>\n<p>F.THE RIGHTS OF INDIVIDUALS UNDER INTERNATIONAL LAW<\/p>\n<p>Case 1-9. De Sanchez v. Banco Central de Nicaragua<\/p>\n<p>G.COMPARISON OF MUNICIPAL LEGAL SYSTEMS<\/p>\n<p>Reading 1-1. The Clash of Civilizations<\/p>\n<p>The Romano-Germanic Civil Law System<\/p>\n<p>Case 1-10. Raulin v. Fischer<\/p>\n<p>The Anglo-American Common Law System<\/p>\n<p>The Islamic Law System<\/p>\n<p>Case 1-11. &#8211; Libyan American Oil Company (Liamco) v. Government of the Libyan Arab Republic<\/p>\n<p>CHAPTER QUESTIONS<\/p>\n<p>REVIEW PROBLEM<\/p>\n<p>Chapter 2 STATE RESPONSIBILITY AND ENVIRONMENTAL REGULATION<\/p>\n<p>Introduction<\/p>\n<p>A.STATE RESPONSIBILITY<\/p>\n<p>Doctrine of Imputability<\/p>\n<p>Case 2-1. Sandline International Inc. v. Papua New Guinea<\/p>\n<p>Nonimputable Acts<\/p>\n<p>Case 2-2. Home Missionary Society Case<\/p>\n<p>Case 2-3. Flatow v. The Islamic Republic Of Iran<\/p>\n<p>Fault and Causation<\/p>\n<p>B.STANDARD OF CARE<\/p>\n<p>The National Standard of Care<\/p>\n<p>Case 2-4. Cantero Herrera v. Canevaro &amp; Co.<\/p>\n<p>The International Standard of Care<\/p>\n<p>Expropriation<\/p>\n<p>Case 2-5. ACSYNGO v. Compagnie de Saint-Gobain (France), SA<\/p>\n<p>Case 2-6. Case Concerning Barcelona Traction, Light, and Power Company, Ltd. (Second Phase)<\/p>\n<p>Denial of Justice<\/p>\n<p>Case 2-7. Chattin v. United Mexican States<\/p>\n<p>C.OBJECTIONS<\/p>\n<p>Lack of Standing<\/p>\n<p>Lack of Nationality<\/p>\n<p>Lack of a Genuine Link<\/p>\n<p>Failure to Exhaust Remedies<\/p>\n<p>Case 2-8. The M\/V &#8220;SAIGA&#8221; (No. 2) Case<\/p>\n<p>Other Objections<\/p>\n<p>D.RELIEF<\/p>\n<p>Case 2-9. Re LETELIER and MOFFITT<\/p>\n<p>E.INSURANCE<\/p>\n<p>Private Insurers<\/p>\n<p>National Investment Guaranty Programs<\/p>\n<p>Case 2-10. In the Matter of Revere Copper and Brass, Inc. and Overseas Private Investment Corporation<\/p>\n<p>Multilateral Investment Guaranty Programs<\/p>\n<p>F.ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION<\/p>\n<p>Regulation of Pollution<\/p>\n<p>Case 2-11. Southern Bluefin Tuna Cases: Provisional Measures<\/p>\n<p>Reading 2-1. The U.S. View: Kyoto Protocol is Fundamentally Flawed<\/p>\n<p>Protection of Natural Resources<\/p>\n<p>Liability for Environmental Damage<\/p>\n<p>CHAPTER QUESTIONS<\/p>\n<p>REVIEW PROBLEM<\/p>\n<p>Chapter 3 DISPUTE SETTLEMENT<\/p>\n<p>A.SETTLEMENT OF DISPUTES THROUGH DIPLOMACY<\/p>\n<p>Negotiation<\/p>\n<p>Mediation<\/p>\n<p>Inquiry<\/p>\n<p>B.SETTLEMENT OF DISPUTES IN INTERNATIONAL TRIBUNALS<\/p>\n<p>International Court of Justice<\/p>\n<p>Case 3-1. Case Concerning Military and Paramilitary Activities in and Against Nicaragua (Jurisdiction and Admissibility) (Dissenting Opinion)<\/p>\n<p>World Trade Organization Dispute Settlement Procedures<\/p>\n<p>Case 3-2. European Communities\u2014Customs Classification of Certain Computer Equipment<\/p>\n<p>Case 3-3. Japan\u2014Taxes on Alcoholic Beverages<\/p>\n<p>International Center for the Settlement of Investment Disputes<\/p>\n<p>Case 3-4. Fedax N.V. v. The Republic of Venezuela<\/p>\n<p>Other Arbitration Tribunals<\/p>\n<p>C.SETTLEMENT OF DISPUTES IN MUNICIPAL COURTS<\/p>\n<p>Jurisdiction in Criminal Cases<\/p>\n<p>Case 3-5. Attorney-General of the Government of Israel v. Eichmann<\/p>\n<p>Jurisdiction in Civil Cases<\/p>\n<p>Case 3-6. Bumper Development Corp., Ltd. v. Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis and Others (Union of India and Others, Claimants)<\/p>\n<p>Case 3-7. Shell v. R.W. Sturge, Ltd.<\/p>\n<p>D.IMMUNITIES OF STATES FROM THE JURISDICTION OF MUNICIPAL COURTS<\/p>\n<p>Sovereign or State Immunity<\/p>\n<p>Case 3-8. Abbott v. Republic of South Africa<\/p>\n<p>Act of State Doctrine<\/p>\n<p>Case 3-9. Regina v. Bartle and the Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis and Others (Ex Parte Pinochet)<\/p>\n<p>E.CHOOSING THE GOVERNING LAW<\/p>\n<p>Agreement of the Parties<\/p>\n<p>Statutory Choice of Law Provisions<\/p>\n<p>Most Significant Relationship<\/p>\n<p>Case 3-10. Bank of India V. Gobindram Naraindas Sadhwani and Others<\/p>\n<p>Governmental Interest<\/p>\n<p>Case 3-11. Reyno v. Piper Aircraft Company<\/p>\n<p>F.REFUSAL TO EXERCISE JURISDICTION<\/p>\n<p>G.OPPOSTION TO THE EXERCISE OF JURISDICTION<\/p>\n<p>Case 3-12. Airbus Industrie G.I.E v. Patel<\/p>\n<p>H.PROVING FOREIGN LAW<\/p>\n<p>I.RECOGNITION OF FOREIGN JUDGMENTS<\/p>\n<p>CHAPTER QUESTIONS<\/p>\n<p>REVIEW PROBLEM<\/p>\n<p>Chapter 4 THE MULTINATIONAL ENTERPRISE<\/p>\n<p>Introduction<\/p>\n<p>A.THE BUSINESS FORM<\/p>\n<p>Business Forms in Civil Law States<\/p>\n<p>Business Forms in Common Law States<\/p>\n<p>Case 4-1. Puerto Rico V. Russell &amp; Co. et al.<\/p>\n<p>The Importance of the Separate Legal Identity of Juridical Entities<\/p>\n<p>Case 4-2. Case Concerning Barcelona Traction, Light and Power Co. (Second Phase)<\/p>\n<p>B.THE MULTINATIONAL ORGANIZATION<\/p>\n<p>The Parent Company<\/p>\n<p>The Subordinate Structure<\/p>\n<p>C.INTERNATIONAL REGULATION OF MULTINATIONAL ENTERPRISES<\/p>\n<p>Reading 4-1. Proposed ISO Standard for Global Business Conduct<\/p>\n<p>D.HOME STATE REGULATION OF MULTINATIONAL ENTERPRISES<\/p>\n<p>Unfair Competition Laws<\/p>\n<p>Case 4-3. Metro Industries v. Sammi Corp.<\/p>\n<p>Case 4-4. M\u00e9tropole T\u00e9l\u00e9vision (M6) v Commission of the European Communities<\/p>\n<p>Products Liability Laws<\/p>\n<p>Case 4-5. Asahi Metal Industry Co., Ltd. v. Superior Court of California, Solano County<\/p>\n<p>Sharp Practices<\/p>\n<p>Case 4-6. United States v. Blondek, Tull, Castle, and Lowry<\/p>\n<p>E.HOST STATE REGULATION OF MULTINATIONAL ENTERPRISES<\/p>\n<p>Consent to the Jurisdiction of the Host State<\/p>\n<p>Common Enterprise Liability<\/p>\n<p>Case 4-7. Touche Ross and Company v. Bank Intercontinental, Limited<\/p>\n<p>Piercing the Company Veil<\/p>\n<p>Case 4-8. Garden Contamination Case (No. 2)<\/p>\n<p>CHAPTER QUESTIONS<\/p>\n<p>REVIEW PROBLEM<\/p>\n<p>Chapter 5 FOREIGN INVESTMENT<\/p>\n<p>A.FOREIGN INVESTMENT LAWS AND CODES<\/p>\n<p>National Foreign Investment Policies<\/p>\n<p>Screening Foreign Investment Applications<\/p>\n<p>Formal and Informal Application Process<\/p>\n<p>Reading 5-1. The Informal Application Process<\/p>\n<p>Approval of Foreign Investment Applications<\/p>\n<p>Case 5-1. Arab Republic of Egypt v. Southern Pacific Properties, Ltd. et al<\/p>\n<p>Business Forms<\/p>\n<p>Limitations on Foreign Equity<\/p>\n<p>Sectoral Limitations<\/p>\n<p>Geographic Limitations<\/p>\n<p>Case 5-2. Brady v. Brown<\/p>\n<p>Free Zones<\/p>\n<p>Case 5-3. Nissan Motor Mfg. Corp., U.S.A. v. United States<\/p>\n<p>Foreign Investment Guarantees<\/p>\n<p>B.SUPERVISION OF FOREIGN INVESTMENT<\/p>\n<p>Start-Up Standards<\/p>\n<p>Operational Reviews<\/p>\n<p>Modification of Foreign Investment Agreements<\/p>\n<p>Protection of Subsidiaries<\/p>\n<p>Case 5-4. Case Concerning Elettronica Sicula, SpA<\/p>\n<p>Case 5-5. The Bhopal Case<\/p>\n<p>Penalties for Noncompliance<\/p>\n<p>C.SECURITIES REGULATIONS<\/p>\n<p>Securities<\/p>\n<p>Trading in Securities<\/p>\n<p>Securities Exchanges<\/p>\n<p>Issuance of Securities<\/p>\n<p>Clearance and Settlement Procedures<\/p>\n<p>Case 5-6. Batchelder v. Kawamoto<\/p>\n<p>Insider Trading Regulations<\/p>\n<p>Case 5-7. United States v. O\u2019Hagan<\/p>\n<p>Takeover Regulations<\/p>\n<p>D.ENFORCEMENT OF SECURITIES REGULATIONS INTERNATIONALLY<\/p>\n<p>Memorandums of Understanding<\/p>\n<p>The Convention on Insider Trading<\/p>\n<p>Extraterritorial Application of U.S. Securities Laws<\/p>\n<p>Case 5-8. Securities and Exchange Commission v. Knowles<\/p>\n<p>CHAPTER QUESTIONS<\/p>\n<p>REVIEW PROBLEM<\/p>\n<p>Chapter 6 MONEY AND BANKING<\/p>\n<p>A.MONEY<\/p>\n<p>The Value of Money<\/p>\n<p>The Choice of Money<\/p>\n<p>Case 6-1. Republic of Argentina et al. v. Weltover, Inc. et al.<\/p>\n<p>Maintaining Monetary Value<\/p>\n<p>B.THE INTERNATIONAL MONETARY FUND<\/p>\n<p>Origin of the IMF<\/p>\n<p>IMF Quotas<\/p>\n<p>Case 6-2. Re Law Authorizing an Increase in the French Quota to the International Monetary Fund<\/p>\n<p>Organization of the IMF<\/p>\n<p>IMF Operations<\/p>\n<p>C.CURRENCY EXCHANGE<\/p>\n<p>Currency Exchange Obligations of IMF Member States<\/p>\n<p>Enforcement of Exchange Control Regulations of IMF Member States<\/p>\n<p>Case 6-3. De Boer, Widow Moojen v. Ducro et al.<\/p>\n<p>Case 6-4. Wilson, Smithett &amp; Cope, Ltd. v. Terruzzi<\/p>\n<p>Enforcement of Exchange Control Laws in the Absence of IMF Membership<\/p>\n<p>Case 6-5. Menendez et al. v. Saks and Company et al.<\/p>\n<p>Enforcement of Other IMF Member State Currency Exchange Obligations<\/p>\n<p>Exemptions for New Members from IMF Member State Currency Exchange Obligations<\/p>\n<p>D.CURRENCY SUPPORT<\/p>\n<p>IMF Facilities<\/p>\n<p>IMF &#8220;Conditionality&#8221;<\/p>\n<p>E.DEVELOPMENT BANKS<\/p>\n<p>F.THE BANK FOR INTERNATIONAL SETTLEMENTS<\/p>\n<p>The Central Banks\u2019 Bank<\/p>\n<p>Promoter of International Monetary Cooperation<\/p>\n<p>Agent for International Settlements<\/p>\n<p>G.REGIONAL MONETARY ORGANIZATIONS<\/p>\n<p>H.NATIONAL MONETARY SYSTEMS<\/p>\n<p>National Monetary Organizations<\/p>\n<p>Bank Deposits<\/p>\n<p>Case 6-6. The Banker\u2019s Case<\/p>\n<p>Reading 6-1. Islamic Banking<\/p>\n<p>Eurocurrency Deposits<\/p>\n<p>The Interbank Deposit Market<\/p>\n<p>The Foreign Exchange Market<\/p>\n<p>Foreign Exchange Contracts<\/p>\n<p>Case 6-7. Hunt et al. c. Alliance North American Government Income Trust, Inc. et al.<\/p>\n<p>Arbitrage<\/p>\n<p>The Transfer of Money<\/p>\n<p>Reading 6-2. The Illicit Transfer of Money<\/p>\n<p>Branch Banking<\/p>\n<p>Case 6-8. In re Sealed Case<\/p>\n<p>Case 6-9. Vishipco Line et al. v. Chase Manhattan Bank, N.A.<\/p>\n<p>Case 6-10. Libyan Arab Foreign Bank v. Bankers Trust Company<\/p>\n<p>CHAPTER QUESTIONS<\/p>\n<p>REVIEW PROBLEM<\/p>\n<p>Chapter 7 TRADE IN GOODS<\/p>\n<p>A.HISTORY OF CONTEMPORARY INTERNATIONAL TRADE LAW<\/p>\n<p>The Bretton Woods System<\/p>\n<p>The 1947 General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade<\/p>\n<p>Multilateral Trade Negotiations<\/p>\n<p>The Uruguay Round<\/p>\n<p>The Final Act Embodying the Results of the Uruguay Round of Multilateral Trade Negotiations<\/p>\n<p>B.THE WORLD TRADE ORGANIZATION<\/p>\n<p>The WTO Agreement<\/p>\n<p>The Membership of the WTO<\/p>\n<p>Structure of the WTO<\/p>\n<p>Decision Making within the WTO<\/p>\n<p>Reading 7-1. The Battle for Seattle<\/p>\n<p>Dispute Settlement<\/p>\n<p>Trade Policy Review<\/p>\n<p>C.THE 1994 GENERAL AGREEMENT ON TARIFFS AND TRADE<\/p>\n<p>Direct Effect<\/p>\n<p>Case 7-1. Finance Ministry v. Manifattura Lane Marzotto, SpA<\/p>\n<p>Nondiscrimination<\/p>\n<p>Case 7-2. Japan\u2014Taxes on Alcoholic Beverages<\/p>\n<p>Protection through Tariffs<\/p>\n<p>Transparency<\/p>\n<p>Regional Integration<\/p>\n<p>Commodity Arrangements<\/p>\n<p>Escape Clause<\/p>\n<p>Exceptions<\/p>\n<p>Case 7-3. United States\u2014Import Prohibition of Certain Shrimp and Shrimp Products<\/p>\n<p>Export Controls<\/p>\n<p>D.MULTILATERAL TRADE AGREEMENTS<\/p>\n<p>Customs Valuation<\/p>\n<p>Case 7-4. Orbisphere Corp. v. United States<\/p>\n<p>Preshipment Inspection<\/p>\n<p>Technical Barriers to Trade<\/p>\n<p>Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures<\/p>\n<p>Case 7-5. Australia\u2014Measures Affecting Importation of Salmon<\/p>\n<p>Trade-Related Investment Measures<\/p>\n<p>Import Licensing Procedures<\/p>\n<p>Antidumping<\/p>\n<p>Subsidies and Countervailing Measures<\/p>\n<p>Case 7-6. Mukand Ltd. v. Council of the European Union<\/p>\n<p>Safeguards<\/p>\n<p>Agriculture<\/p>\n<p>Textiles and Clothing<\/p>\n<p>Rules of Origin<\/p>\n<p>CHAPTER QUESTIONS<\/p>\n<p>REVIEW PROBLEM<\/p>\n<p>Chapter 8 SERVICES AND LABOR<\/p>\n<p>Introduction<\/p>\n<p>A.THE GENERAL AGREEMENT ON TRADE IN SERVICES<\/p>\n<p>Framework Agreement<\/p>\n<p>Case 8-1. European Communities\u2014Regime for the Importation, Sale, and Distribution of Bananas<\/p>\n<p>GATS Annexes<\/p>\n<p>GATS Schedules of Specific Commitments<\/p>\n<p>B.REGIONAL INTERGOVERNMENTAL REGULATIONS ON TRADE IN SERVICES<\/p>\n<p>European Union Law on Trade in Services<\/p>\n<p>Case 8-2. Jany v. Staatssecretaris van Justitie<\/p>\n<p>Provisions Governing Trade in Services in the North American Free Trade Agreement<\/p>\n<p>C.INTERNATIONAL LABOR LAW<\/p>\n<p>International Labor Organization<\/p>\n<p>Case 8-3. Duberg v. UNESCO<\/p>\n<p>The Human Rights of Workers<\/p>\n<p>Case 8-4. Doe v. Unocal Corp.<\/p>\n<p>D.REGIONAL INTERGOVERNMENTAL REGULATIONS ON LABOR<\/p>\n<p>Employment Laws in the European Union<\/p>\n<p>Employment Standards of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development<\/p>\n<p>Protection of Workers\u2019 Rights by the Council of Europe<\/p>\n<p>Transnational Organized Labor<\/p>\n<p>E.MOVEMENT OF WORKERS<\/p>\n<p>Case 8-5. State v. Nagami<\/p>\n<p>Visas<\/p>\n<p>Case 8-6. Republic v. Mussa and Five Others<\/p>\n<p>Case 8-7. England and Another v. Attorney-General of St. Lucia<\/p>\n<p>Regulation of Foreign Workers<\/p>\n<p>Case 8-8. George v. International Air Service Co., Ltd.<\/p>\n<p>Case 8-9. Spiess et al. c. C. Itoh &amp; Co. (America), Inc.<\/p>\n<p>Application of Home State Labor Laws Extraterritorially<\/p>\n<p>Case 8-10. Morelli v. Cedel<\/p>\n<p>CHAPTER QUESTIONS<\/p>\n<p>REVIEW PROBLEM<\/p>\n<p>Chapter 9 INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY<\/p>\n<p>Introduction<\/p>\n<p>A.THE CREATION OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS<\/p>\n<p>Copyrights<\/p>\n<p>Case 9-1. Performing Right Society, Limited v. Hickey<\/p>\n<p>Case 9-2. Quality King Distributors, Inc. v. L\u2019anza Research International, Inc.<\/p>\n<p>Patents<\/p>\n<p>Case 9-3. Monsanto Co. V. Coramandal Indag Products, (P) Ltd.<\/p>\n<p>Trademarks<\/p>\n<p>Case 9-4. Experience Hendrix, L.L.C. v. Hammerton<\/p>\n<p>Know-how<\/p>\n<p>B.INTERNATIONAL INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY ORGANIZATIONS<\/p>\n<p>World Intellectual Property Organization<\/p>\n<p>Council for Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights<\/p>\n<p>C.INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY TREATIES<\/p>\n<p>Comprehensive Agreements<\/p>\n<p>Artistic Property Agreements<\/p>\n<p>Industrial Property Agreements<\/p>\n<p>D.THE INTERNATIONAL TRANSFER OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY<\/p>\n<p>E.LICENSING REGULATIONS<\/p>\n<p>Territorial Restrictions<\/p>\n<p>Case 9-5. Consten and Grundig v. Commission<\/p>\n<p>Export Restrictions<\/p>\n<p>Cartels<\/p>\n<p>Exclusive Licenses<\/p>\n<p>Case 9-6. Ransome-Kuti v. Phonogram, Ltd.<\/p>\n<p>Sales and Distribution Arrangements<\/p>\n<p>Price Fixing<\/p>\n<p>Noncompetition Clauses<\/p>\n<p>Challenges to Validity<\/p>\n<p>Tying Clauses<\/p>\n<p>Quantity and Field-of-use Restrictions<\/p>\n<p>Restrictions on Research and Development<\/p>\n<p>Quality Controls<\/p>\n<p>Grant-back Provisions<\/p>\n<p>Restrictions that Apply After the Expiration of Intellectual Property Rights<\/p>\n<p>Restrictions that Apply After the Expiration of the Licensing Agreement<\/p>\n<p>F.COMPULSORY LICENSES<\/p>\n<p>Patents<\/p>\n<p>Reading 9-1. Compulsory Patent Licenses in the Fight Against AIDS<\/p>\n<p>Copyrights<\/p>\n<p>CHAPTER QUESTIONS<\/p>\n<p>REVIEW PROBLEM<\/p>\n<p>Chapter 10 SALES<\/p>\n<p>A.UNITED NATIONS CONVENTION ON CONTRACTS FOR THE INTERNATIONAL SALE OF GOODS<\/p>\n<p>B.TRANSACTIONS COVERED IN CISG<\/p>\n<p>Opting In and Out<\/p>\n<p>Case 10-1. Asante Technologies, Inc. v. PMC-Sierra, Inc.<\/p>\n<p>Sales Defined<\/p>\n<p>Goods Defined<\/p>\n<p>Mixed Sales<\/p>\n<p>C.CONTRACTUAL ISSUES EXCLUDED FROM THE COVERAGE OF CISG<\/p>\n<p>Illegality and Incompetency<\/p>\n<p>Third-Party Claims and Personal Injuries<\/p>\n<p>Preemption<\/p>\n<p>D.INTERPRETING CISG<\/p>\n<p>The Convention<\/p>\n<p>General Principles<\/p>\n<p>Rules of Private International Law<\/p>\n<p>E.INTERPRETING SALES CONTRACTS<\/p>\n<p>Statements and Conduct of the Parties<\/p>\n<p>Negotiations<\/p>\n<p>Case 10-2. MCC Marble Ceramic v. Ceramica<\/p>\n<p>Practices and Usages<\/p>\n<p>Form<\/p>\n<p>F.FORMATION OF THE CONTRACT<\/p>\n<p>The Offer<\/p>\n<p>Effectiveness of an Offer<\/p>\n<p>Acceptance<\/p>\n<p>Case 10-3. United Technologies International, Inc. v. Magyar L\u00e9gi K\u00f6zleked\u00e9si V\u00e1llalat<\/p>\n<p>Acceptance with Modifications<\/p>\n<p>Case 10-4. Filanto, SpA v. Chilewich International Corp.<\/p>\n<p>G.GENERAL STANDARDS FOR PERFORMANCE<\/p>\n<p>Fundamental Breach<\/p>\n<p>Avoidance<\/p>\n<p>Requests for Specific Performance<\/p>\n<p>H.SELLER\u2019S OBLIGATIONS<\/p>\n<p>Place for Delivery<\/p>\n<p>Time for Delivery<\/p>\n<p>The Turning Over of Documents<\/p>\n<p>Conformity of Goods<\/p>\n<p>I.BUYER\u2019S OBLIGATIONS<\/p>\n<p>Payment of the Price<\/p>\n<p>Case 10-5. The Natural Gas Case<\/p>\n<p>Taking Delivery<\/p>\n<p>J.THE PASSING OF RISK<\/p>\n<p>Agreement of the Parties<\/p>\n<p>Means of Delivery<\/p>\n<p>Breach of Contract<\/p>\n<p>K.REMEDIES<\/p>\n<p>Buyer\u2019s Remedies<\/p>\n<p>Reading 10-1. The Buyer\u2019s Right to Avoid the Contract<\/p>\n<p>Case 10-6. The Shoe Seller\u2019s Case<\/p>\n<p>Seller\u2019s Remedies<\/p>\n<p>Remedies Available to Both Buyers and Sellers<\/p>\n<p>Case 10-7. Downs Investments Pty. Ltd. v. Perwaja Steel SDN BHD<\/p>\n<p>L.EXCUSES FOR NONPERFORMANCE<\/p>\n<p>Force Majeure<\/p>\n<p>Case 10-8. Nuova Fucinati, S.p.A. v. Fondmetall International, A.B.<\/p>\n<p>Dirty Hands<\/p>\n<p>CHAPTER QUESTIONS<\/p>\n<p>REVIEW PROBLEM<\/p>\n<p>Chapter 11 TRANSPORTATION<\/p>\n<p>A.TRADE TERMS<\/p>\n<p>Case 11-1. St. Paul Guardian Insurance Company v. Neuromed Medical Systems &amp; Support, GmbH<\/p>\n<p>A Note on the Incoterms<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;Free&#8221; Terms<\/p>\n<p>FOB\u2013Free On Board<\/p>\n<p>Case 11-2. Pyrene Co., Ltd. v. Scindia Navigation Co., Ltd.<\/p>\n<p>FAS\u2013Free Alongside Ship<\/p>\n<p>CIF\u2013Cost, Insurance, and Freight<\/p>\n<p>CFR\u2013Cost and Freight<\/p>\n<p>Case 11-3. Phillips Puerto Rico Core, Inc. v. Tradax Petroleum, Ltd.<\/p>\n<p>DES\u2013Delivered Ex Ship<\/p>\n<p>FCA\u2013Free Carrier<\/p>\n<p>EXW\u2013Ex Works<\/p>\n<p>B.TRANSPORTATION<\/p>\n<p>C.INLAND CARRIAGE<\/p>\n<p>D.CARRIAGE OF GOODS BY SEA<\/p>\n<p>Common Carriage<\/p>\n<p>The Bill of Lading<\/p>\n<p>Case 11-4. M. Golodetz &amp; Co., Inc. v. Czarnikow-Rionda Co., Inc. (The Galitia)<\/p>\n<p>Case 11-5. Barclays Bank, Ltd. v. Commissioners of Customs and Excise<\/p>\n<p>The Carrier\u2019s Duties Under a Bill of Lading<\/p>\n<p>The Carrier\u2019s Immunities<\/p>\n<p>Case 11-6. Great China Metal Industries Co. Ltd. v. Malaysian International Shipping Corp.<\/p>\n<p>Liability Limits<\/p>\n<p>Case 11-7. Croft &amp; Scully Co. v M\/V Skulptor Vuchetich et al.<\/p>\n<p>Time Limitations<\/p>\n<p>Third-Party Rights (Himalaya Clause)<\/p>\n<p>E.CHARTERPARTIES<\/p>\n<p>Voyage Charterparties<\/p>\n<p>Time Charterparties<\/p>\n<p>Charterparties and Bills of Lading<\/p>\n<p>F.MARITIME LIENS<\/p>\n<p>Case 11-8. The Chinese Seamen\u2019s Foreign Technical Services Co. v. Soto Grande Shipping Corp., SA<\/p>\n<p>G.MARITIME INSURANCE<\/p>\n<p>Perils<\/p>\n<p>Case 11-9. Western Assurance Co. of Toronto v. Shaw<\/p>\n<p>Average Clauses<\/p>\n<p>H.CARRIAGE OF GOODS BY AIR<\/p>\n<p>Case 11-10. Abnett v. British Airways Plc.<\/p>\n<p>CHAPTER QUESTIONS<\/p>\n<p>REVIEW PROBLEM<\/p>\n<p>Chapter 12 FINANCING<\/p>\n<p>A.FINANCING FOREIGN TRADE<\/p>\n<p>B.BILLS OF LADING<\/p>\n<p>C.BILLS OF EXCHANGE<\/p>\n<p>The Law Governing Bills of Exchange<\/p>\n<p>Types of Bills of Exchange<\/p>\n<p>D.PROMISSORY NOTES<\/p>\n<p>E.NEGOTIABILITY OF BILLS AND NOTES<\/p>\n<p>Unconditional Promise or Order to Pay<\/p>\n<p>Definite Sum of Money or Monetary Unit of Account<\/p>\n<p>Payable on Demand or at a Definite Time<\/p>\n<p>Signed by the Maker or Drawer<\/p>\n<p>Case 12-1. Constantaras v. Anagnostopoulos<\/p>\n<p>F.THE NEGOTIATION AND TRANSFER OF BILLS AND NOTES<\/p>\n<p>Assignment<\/p>\n<p>Negotiation<\/p>\n<p>Case 12-2. Miller v. Race<\/p>\n<p>Forged Endorsements<\/p>\n<p>Case 12-3. Mair v. Bank of Nova Scotia<\/p>\n<p>Limitations on the Excuses that Drawers and Makers Can Use to Avoid Paying Off a Bill or Note<\/p>\n<p>Liabilities of Makers, Drawers, Drawees, Endorsers, and Accommodation Parties<\/p>\n<p>Case 12-4. Far East Realty Investment, Inc. v. Court of Appeals et al.<\/p>\n<p>The Role of Banks in Collecting and Paying Negotiable Instruments<\/p>\n<p>Case 12-5. Charles R. Allen, Inc. v. Island Cooperative Services Cooperative Association<\/p>\n<p>G.LETTERS OF CREDIT<\/p>\n<p>Governing Law<\/p>\n<p>Applying for a Letter of Credit<\/p>\n<p>Case 12-6. Trans Trust Sprl v. Danubian Trading Co., Ltd.<\/p>\n<p>Documentary Formalities<\/p>\n<p>Advising and Confirming Letters of Credit<\/p>\n<p>The Obligations of Banks<\/p>\n<p>Case 12-7. Sztejn v. J. Henry Schroeder Banking Corp.<\/p>\n<p>Rights and Responsibilities of the Account Party<\/p>\n<p>Rights and Responsibilities of Beneficiaries<\/p>\n<p>H.FINANCING FOREIGN OPERATIONS<\/p>\n<p>Private Sources of Capital<\/p>\n<p>Governmental Sources of Capital<\/p>\n<p>Regional and International Development Agencies<\/p>\n<p>I.COUNTERTRADE<\/p>\n<p>Reading 12-1. The Pros and Cons of Countertrade<\/p>\n<p>CHAPTER QUESTIONS<\/p>\n<p>REVIEW PROBLEM<\/p>\n<p>Chapter 13 TAXATION<\/p>\n<p>A.PURPOSES OF TAXATION<\/p>\n<p>Case 13-1. In Re Natural Sweet Wines<\/p>\n<p>B.INCOME TAXES<\/p>\n<p>C.TAXPAYERS<\/p>\n<p>Company Taxpayers<\/p>\n<p>Subordinate Business Structures<\/p>\n<p>Case 13-2. Reiss and Company (Nigeria), Ltd. v. Federal Board of Inland Revenue<\/p>\n<p>D.BASES OF INCOME TAXATION<\/p>\n<p>Nationality Principle<\/p>\n<p>Case 13-3. Cook v. Tait, United States Collector of Internal Revenue for the District of Maryland<\/p>\n<p>Residency Principle<\/p>\n<p>Case 13-4. Crown Forest Industries Ltd. v. Canada<\/p>\n<p>Source Principle<\/p>\n<p>Case 13-5. Bank of the Federated States of Micronesia v. Government of the Federated States of Micronesia<\/p>\n<p>Interrelationship of Taxation Bases<\/p>\n<p>Persons Immune from Taxation<\/p>\n<p>E.INCOME<\/p>\n<p>Income Categories<\/p>\n<p>Computation of Income<\/p>\n<p>Income Tax Rates<\/p>\n<p>Case 13-6. Mobil Oil (Nigeria), Ltd. v. Federal Board of Inland Revenue<\/p>\n<p>Integration of Company and Personal Income Taxes<\/p>\n<p>Other Tax Generating Transactions<\/p>\n<p>F.DOUBLE TAXATION<\/p>\n<p>Systems for Relief from Double Taxation<\/p>\n<p>Comparison of the Double Taxation Relief Systems<\/p>\n<p>Case 13-7. Director General of Inland Revenue v. Rothmans of Pall Mall (Malaysia) Bhd.<\/p>\n<p>G.TAX TREATIES<\/p>\n<p>Coverage of Tax Treaties<\/p>\n<p>Basis for Taxation<\/p>\n<p>Double Taxation Provisions<\/p>\n<p>Case 13-8. Johansson v. United States<\/p>\n<p>H.TAX INCENTIVES<\/p>\n<p>Tax Sparing<\/p>\n<p>The Interaction of Tax Systems<\/p>\n<p>I.TAX AVOIDANCE AND EVASION<\/p>\n<p>Tax Avoidance<\/p>\n<p>Reading 13-1. Reincorporating Abroad to Minimize Taxes as an Act of Patriotism<\/p>\n<p>Case 13-9. Barclays Bank, PLC v. Franchise Tax Board of California<\/p>\n<p>Tax Evasion<\/p>\n<p>Case 13-10. Kalo v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue<\/p>\n<p>J.OTHER FORMS OF TAXATION<\/p>\n<p>Turnover Taxes<\/p>\n<p>Reading 13-2. Defining the Value-Added Tax<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>List of International Business Law Selected Court Decisions, by Topic in Europe   \t Legal Status of Eastern Greenland: Treaties and Conventions (Sources of International Law)  \t The Asylum Case: Custom (Sources of International Law)   &nbsp;  D.THE SCOPE OF INTERNATIONAL LAW IN ACTUAL PRACTICE [&#8230;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[96,254,195,10,52],"tags":[274,183,118,82],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/lawlegal.eu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6399"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/lawlegal.eu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/lawlegal.eu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lawlegal.eu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lawlegal.eu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=6399"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/lawlegal.eu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6399\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/lawlegal.eu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=6399"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lawlegal.eu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=6399"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lawlegal.eu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=6399"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}