.jpg” alt=”HI cmyk log pos pc”>
|
LEGAL ASPECTS OF INTERNATIONAL
BUSINESS AND ENTERPRISE
TRIMESTER 1, 2014
RESEARCH ASSIGNMENT 1
Assessment
Value: 30%
Instructions:
1. You must attach a cover sheet,
documentation to evidence that your assignment has been safe assigned, and receive
a dated signature from your lecturer or administration on submission.
2.
Maximum
marks available: 30 marks.
3.
You
should refer to the prescribed textbook, other recommended textbooks, and any relevant
Treaties, Conventions, Acts and Cases in your answer.
4.
Maximum
word length is 3000 words.
5.
This
paper is due in Week 6, Friday by 5pm.
Part
one: International and Comparative Law (15 Marks) Maximum word length is 1500
words
With regard to the relationship between
treaties and Australian law, Campbell JA in Samootin v. Shea [2012] NSWCA 378
made the following observation (at [33] citations omitted):
“International treaties that have been
ratified by the Australian government do not as such form part of our domestic
law or operate as a direct source of individual rights and obligations under
that law. “
Explain this statement and give
particular examples of treaties ratified by the Australian government which
have become part of domestic or municipal law.
Part
two: State Responsibility and Environmental Regulation (15 Marks) Maximum word
length is 1500 words
Ecks Company was incorporated in State
X, but has its headquarters, operating plant, most of its employees, and most
of its shareholders in State Y. In 1980,
a small branch office of Ecks Co. in State Z hired an industrial spy, Mr. O. O.
Seven, to obtain secrets from a large competitor in State Z. The spy was successful. For more than a year he supplied the branch with
the competitor’s most important industrial secrets, which the branch in turn
passed on to Ecks Co. The competitor was
a contractor of State Z, and many of the secrets the spy uncovered related to
State Z’s national defense.
Unfortunately, Mr. Seven was caught red-handed in 1981. He was arrested and convicted of
espionage. In bargaining for a reduced
sentence, he agreed to testify against the Ecks Co. and its branch office’s
manager.
As a consequence, State Z prosecuted
both the Ecks Co. and its branch office’s manager for espionage. The manager was found guilty, fined, and
sentenced to a prison term. The Ecks Co.
did not hire a lawyer to represent it in court, and it did not appear to answer
the charges against it. The court
entered a default judgment and confiscated all of the assets of the branch as
punishment. Ecks Co. never appeared to
appeal this decision to State Z’s appellate courts.
Subsequent efforts by Ecks Co. to set
up a new branch in State Z were disallowed.
Ecks Co. has long fumed over the loss of its State Z branch and the
sentence handed down by the State Z court.
Finally, this year, it was able to
persuade State X to bring a suit on its behalf before the International Court
of Justice (ICJ). Both State X and State
Z have recognized the jurisdiction of the ICJ to resolve this dispute. State X alleges that the Ecks Co. was denied
justice.
Are there any objections to the ICJ’s
jurisdiction that State Z may be able to raise?
