Sunday, May 12, 2019

Law of International Trade Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 3500 words

Law of International Trade - Essay modelThe two agreed that payment would be done through a letter of credit, through a bank that the two parties would agree on. However, on Feb 17, 2012, NASS suggested to MSC that they could transfer the goods through the M/S spry Delivery, which was already at the port of Mumbai. The two CEOs agreed on how this would be done. The ch all(prenominal)enge During loading the goods to the ship, it is indicated that the stretch out snapped causing want of 1,000 units instantly. However, upon leaving the port, the Master M/S Speedy Delivery recorded that all the materials, which had been requested by NASS, had been loaded on the ship. This is despite the fact that 1,000 units had already accidentally dropped in piddle and therefore, remaining only 9,000 units. On March 20, 2012, Somalia pirates attacked the ship where 3,000 units of speakers were stolen. In the process of struggle, further 1,000 units were destroyed. This was a loss that had not been anticipated by any of the parties in the specialize. In addition to this loss, it is indicated that as the ship unexpended(a) for Southampton, it faced challenges at the Mediterranean Sea. Due to dangerous and unexpected waves, about 1,000 more units were lost. The remaining units (4,000) arrived at the Southampton Port on 10th, April 2012. According to the NASS representatives at the port, only 9,000 units had been loaded in the ship before it left from Mumbai. This was against had been indicated in the bill of lading. Of the 4,000 units delivered, only 3,000 were functional. The inspectors indicated that the 1,000 units, which were malfunctioned, could trace their defect from the manufacturing company in Mumbai. For that reason, NASS has the chastise to make claims for insurance both from the owners of the ship and the manufacturing company. Question 1 you are a trainee solicitor in a flourishing Circle law firm in London. You have been asked by the Chair of the Internation al Sale Contracts plane section of the law firm to explain what rights, if any, NASS may have against MSC in respect of the breach, if any, of the international bargain of goods contract entered into between the CEOs of both corporations. The Chair does not want you to consider the breach, if any, of any carriage of goods contract by the owner(s) of the M/S Speedy Delivery, nor the Rome 1 Regulation of the European Union. In the preceding(prenominal) statement of the case, it is clear that NASS is guaranteed compensation by both the owners of the ship and the exporting company. The losses suffered could be attributed to the mistakes by both the owners of the ship and the exporters. From the terms and conditions of sale, the contract will only remain valid if all goods delivered to NASS were character goods. However, upon inspection by NASS, 1,000 units of goods delivered were found to be defective. This is a good ground for the company to sue for damages. In international trade laws, the importing companies would receive compensation through two main ways. Firstly, the 1,000 units which were malfunctioned could be replaced with type others. For that reason, MSC would be required to compensate NASS by providing 1,000 units. This owes to the fact that the company was to blame for the malfunctioned goods. Secondly, NASS has a right to ask for a refund of amount equivalent to that of the malfunctioned goods. As indicated in the agreement, each of the unit was to address 400 pounds. With 1000 units destroyed, NASS has a right

No comments:

Post a Comment