Bus 410 Midterm #1 (Sperow) || Error-free Answers 100%.
Tarbert Trading, Ltd. V. Cometals, Inc.
(deals with trade) correct answers Cometals buys beans from Tarbert (beans originally from
kanya). Cometals wants to sell to a company in Columbia but Colombia required a certificate of
origin issued by a Chamber of Commerce.
Cometals colluded with Tarbert on wording of certificate. However, Cometals refuses beans
because of insect damage... Tarbert sues. Cometals states contract should be void because Tarbert
committed fraud.
IMPORTANCE:
- No Certificate of Origin
- Trading companies (Tarbert) committed fraudulent documents and could not successfully sue
- Against public policy
Russian Entertainment Wholesale, Inc. v.
Close-Up International, Inc.
(deals with International licensing agreements) correct answers Russian film company granted
limited rights to distributors. Close-Up could only play films in original Russian language.
Ruscico could distribute multi- lingual versions of the same films but with subtitles. No one
realized you could just turn off subtitles
Close-Up brought this action against Ruscico for damages for copyright infringement of Russian
language only films.
IMPORTANCE:
- No grounds for copyright infringement because Ruscico only distributed multi-lingual DVDs
with subtitles.
- Still in scope of limited licensee agreement
,- protected by licensee agreement
Dayan v. McDonald's Corp.
(deals with international franchise agreements) correct answers Dayan received rights to operate
a McDonalds in Paris. Dayan signed licensee agreement that stated he had to comply with certain
cleanliness rules. Dayan ran a filthy operation and after multiple failures of cleanliness
inspections McDonalds terminated franchise with Dayan. Dayan Sues under not having
assistance to provide a clean restaurant and needed a French-speaking to help clarify. It did not
help, evidence was compelling.
IMPORTANCE:
- McDonald's held true to its contract and Dayan violated agreements
In re Union Carbide Corporation
Gas Plant Disaster at Bhopal
(deals with challenges of doing business with developing countries) correct answers UCC is a
large chemical company. UCIL is in India and is a subsidiary of UCC. UCC issued a license
agreement saying that UCIL could build a new plant in Bhopal. Almost all workers on job were
Indian.
Plant explodes killing many people (mostly Indian People). India files complaint against UCC in
New York. UCC said all proceedings should be held in India.
IMPORTANCE:
- The doctrine of forum non conveniens:
(a case is properly heard in the courts of more than one country, it should be heard in the country
with the greater interest or most convenient)
- Everything about case pointed towards court in India... so it was held in India. It was
convenient!
Transatlantic Financing Corp. v. United States
, (deals with common risk with international business) correct answers US contracted with
Transatlantic to transport wheat from Texas to Iran. In contract it did not state where the route
needed to take place. Transatlantic had to avoid war going on in Israel and Egypt so they went
the long way which ended up costing 14% more than originally planned.
Transatlantic sued for added expenses. They did not win.
IMPORTANCE:
- alternate route did not make the contract commercially impracticable, (and therefore not legally
impossible) to perform.
- Contract didn't have a mandatory route
- US is protected by contract
Gaskin v. Stumm Handel
(Language barriers) correct answers a US citizen enters contract with Stumm Handel a German
company. Contract written entirely in German. Person signs contract but was read to him in
English. Included in contract was a "forum selection clause" stating if a dispute were to happen it
would be handled in Germany.
Dispute happens and US citizen brings action in the US and says that his failure to understand
German rendered the forum selection clause invalid.
IMPORTANCE:
- failure to speak or read German was not grounds for invalidating any of the provisions of the
contract.
- signed the documents / contract knowing he did not read or speak German.
- Stumm Handel is protected by contract
Bernina Distributors v. Bernina
Sewing Machine Co
Tarbert Trading, Ltd. V. Cometals, Inc.
(deals with trade) correct answers Cometals buys beans from Tarbert (beans originally from
kanya). Cometals wants to sell to a company in Columbia but Colombia required a certificate of
origin issued by a Chamber of Commerce.
Cometals colluded with Tarbert on wording of certificate. However, Cometals refuses beans
because of insect damage... Tarbert sues. Cometals states contract should be void because Tarbert
committed fraud.
IMPORTANCE:
- No Certificate of Origin
- Trading companies (Tarbert) committed fraudulent documents and could not successfully sue
- Against public policy
Russian Entertainment Wholesale, Inc. v.
Close-Up International, Inc.
(deals with International licensing agreements) correct answers Russian film company granted
limited rights to distributors. Close-Up could only play films in original Russian language.
Ruscico could distribute multi- lingual versions of the same films but with subtitles. No one
realized you could just turn off subtitles
Close-Up brought this action against Ruscico for damages for copyright infringement of Russian
language only films.
IMPORTANCE:
- No grounds for copyright infringement because Ruscico only distributed multi-lingual DVDs
with subtitles.
- Still in scope of limited licensee agreement
,- protected by licensee agreement
Dayan v. McDonald's Corp.
(deals with international franchise agreements) correct answers Dayan received rights to operate
a McDonalds in Paris. Dayan signed licensee agreement that stated he had to comply with certain
cleanliness rules. Dayan ran a filthy operation and after multiple failures of cleanliness
inspections McDonalds terminated franchise with Dayan. Dayan Sues under not having
assistance to provide a clean restaurant and needed a French-speaking to help clarify. It did not
help, evidence was compelling.
IMPORTANCE:
- McDonald's held true to its contract and Dayan violated agreements
In re Union Carbide Corporation
Gas Plant Disaster at Bhopal
(deals with challenges of doing business with developing countries) correct answers UCC is a
large chemical company. UCIL is in India and is a subsidiary of UCC. UCC issued a license
agreement saying that UCIL could build a new plant in Bhopal. Almost all workers on job were
Indian.
Plant explodes killing many people (mostly Indian People). India files complaint against UCC in
New York. UCC said all proceedings should be held in India.
IMPORTANCE:
- The doctrine of forum non conveniens:
(a case is properly heard in the courts of more than one country, it should be heard in the country
with the greater interest or most convenient)
- Everything about case pointed towards court in India... so it was held in India. It was
convenient!
Transatlantic Financing Corp. v. United States
, (deals with common risk with international business) correct answers US contracted with
Transatlantic to transport wheat from Texas to Iran. In contract it did not state where the route
needed to take place. Transatlantic had to avoid war going on in Israel and Egypt so they went
the long way which ended up costing 14% more than originally planned.
Transatlantic sued for added expenses. They did not win.
IMPORTANCE:
- alternate route did not make the contract commercially impracticable, (and therefore not legally
impossible) to perform.
- Contract didn't have a mandatory route
- US is protected by contract
Gaskin v. Stumm Handel
(Language barriers) correct answers a US citizen enters contract with Stumm Handel a German
company. Contract written entirely in German. Person signs contract but was read to him in
English. Included in contract was a "forum selection clause" stating if a dispute were to happen it
would be handled in Germany.
Dispute happens and US citizen brings action in the US and says that his failure to understand
German rendered the forum selection clause invalid.
IMPORTANCE:
- failure to speak or read German was not grounds for invalidating any of the provisions of the
contract.
- signed the documents / contract knowing he did not read or speak German.
- Stumm Handel is protected by contract
Bernina Distributors v. Bernina
Sewing Machine Co
