江科大中澳班国际商法复习

PART AThis part is compulsory. It contains 5 (five) questions. Y ou are required to answer each of the questions. Each question is worth six marks. Y ou are required to write down your right answers on your examination paper.1. Describe choices for parties in an arbitration2. Describe protectionist measures besides tariffs3. Describe methods of international commercial dispute settlement4. Describe TRIPS5.Describe coverage of UNIDROIT Principles6. Why is domestic contract law relevant where to international sales contracts where both buyer and seller’s countries are contracting parties to the Convention on the International Sale of Goods 1980 (CISG)?7. In relation to the international carriage of goods, explain what is meant by ‘the amended Hague Rules’ and where they are to be found. Do they apply in China? Do they apply in Australia?8. Describe WTO dispute resolution9. Describe CISG10. Describe Bills of Lading and their FunctionsPART BThis part is compulsory. It contains 10 (ten) short items. Y ou are required to answer each part of this question. Each item is worth three marks. Y ou are required to circle your right answers on your examination paper.1. The customs deductive value is based on the price actually paid for the greatest number of units sold to related persons in the importing country at about the same time.True/False2.A service mark is a mark used in the sale or advertising of services to identifythe services of one person and distinguish them from the services of another.True/False3.The difference between the national multinational enterprise and the internationalmultinational enterprise is that the international multinational enterprise has two or more parent companies located in different states.True/False4. Safeguards are regular actions that a WTO member state may take to protect its domesticindustries from serious injury from a sudden increase in the quantity of an importedproduct.True/False5. A patent is a statutory privilege granted by the government to inventors, and to othersderiving their rights from the inventor, for unfixed period of years, to exclude other persons from manufacturing, using, or selling a patented product or from utilizing a patented method or process. T rue/False6. A license is a nonexclusive revocable privilege that allows a licensee to use a licensor’sproperty.True/False7. Foreign investors are required to supply screening agencies with quite detailed informationabout their proposals. This include : the proposed location of the industryTrue/False8. CISG applies to contracts for the national sale of goods.True/False9. A bill of lading is an instrument issued by an ocean carrier to a shipper w ith whom thecarrier has entered into a contract for the carriage of goods.True/False10. Only the Hague Rules exempt carriers from liability from damages that arisefrom any Act of war.True/False11. The Hamburg Rules relating to sea carriage documents for international carriage of goods will apply in the following situation: A bill of lading is issued for a carriage of goods between a port in Eastasia and the port of Melbourne, Australia. Eastasia is not a signatory to, and does not give effect to, either the 1924 Brussels Convention or the Hamburg convention.True/False12.The Appellate body in WTO is an appeals board made up of seven persons. The term ofoffice is four years, renewable once.True/False13.The difference between the national multinational enterprise and the internationalmultinational enterprise is that the international multinational enterprise has two or more parent companies located in different states.True/False14. Safeguards are regular actions that a WTO member state may take to protect its domesticindustries from serious injury from a sudden increase in the quantity of an importedproduct.True/False15. A patent is a statutory privilege granted by the government to inventors, and to others deriving their rights from the inventor, for unfixed period of years, to exclude other persons from manufacturing, using, or selling a patented product or from utilizing a patented method or process. T rue/False16. A licens e is a nonexclusive revocable privilege that allows a licensee to use a licensor’sproperty.True/False17. Foreign investors are required to supply screening agencies with quite detailedinformation about their proposals. This include : the proposed location of the industryTrue/False18. CISG applies to contracts for the national sale of goods.True/False19. A bill of lading is an instrument issued by an ocean carrier to a shipper with whom thecarrier has entered into a contract for the carriage of goods.True/False20. A maritime lien is a charge or claim against a vessel, its freight, or its cargo.True/FalsePART C:This part is compulsory. It contains two cases. Y ou are required to attempt all of the two cases. Each case carries twenty marks. Y ou are required to write down your answers on your examination paper.Case 1US ruling on solar panels 'unreasonableUpdated: 2012-05-19 09:16By Du Juan and Ding Qingf en in Beijing and Zhang Yuwei in N ew York ( C hina Daily)China on Friday rejected a US anti-dumping ruling against Chinese solar power equipment, calling it "unfair" and "unreasonable", as Chinese manufacturers warned that possible higher tariffs might hurt efforts to promote clean energy.Shen Danyang, spokesman for the Ministry of Commerce, condemned the US anti-dumping tariffs as trade protectionism."By deliberately provoking trade friction in the clean energy sector, the United States is sending the world a negative signal about trade protectionism," Shen said in a statement.The two governments have pledged to cooperate in developing renewable energy but have accused each other of violating free-trade pledges by subsidizing their own manufacturers.Thursday's preliminary ruling by the US Department of Commerce said Chinese producers sold solar cells and panels below fair price and hurt American producers. If that ruling is upheld, tariffs averaging 31 percent could be imposed on Chinese solar-panel imports.Also on Friday, the Chinese Renewable Energy Industries Association said that China is requesting the US Department of Commerce to "recheck the facts and make the right decision" without being affected by the US election.Top Chinese exporters, including Suntech Power Holdings and Trina Solar, were punished with tariffs of about 31 percent.Other Chinese solar companies will face import duties from 31 percent to 250 percent, although the levels could be changed before the final ruling from the commerce department in October.According to the US Department of Commerce, imports of solar cells from China in 2011 were valued at an estimated $3.1 billion."Chinese companies will lose their price advantage compared with US companies with the high import taxes," said Gao Hongling, deputy secretary-general of the China Photovoltaic IndustryAlliance.The US decision to impose import duties on Chinese solar panels will raise their price to $1.11 per watt, according to calculations by Bloomberg New Energy Finance.That price is 17 percent higher than the current spot price of non-Chinese panels, said the research.There is also worry whether Europe will follow the US, Gao said.The European Union is considering whether to launch an anti-dumping and anti-subsidy investigation into imports of Chinese photovoltaic solar panels."If Europe proposes an investigation, Chinese companies will suffer a lot," Gao said.China exports more than 90 percent of its photovoltaic solar cells to the US and European markets.The new ruling stems from a complaint filed in October by the US subsidiary of Germany's SolarWorld and six other US companies that alleged Chinese companies received illegal government subsidies and dumped products in the US market.Other industry players in the US, however, disagree with SolarWorld's allegation and say the decision will backfire."It is our feeling that given the current climate in the United States, blocking Chinese companies from the US will simply shift imports from other places" such as Malaysia and India, said Jigar Shah, president of the Coalition for Affordable Solar Energy, a group of US and Chinese firms that promotes free trade and opposes trade protectionism in the solar power industry."We intend to strongly defend with data our position that these duties are unwarranted and serve as an impediment to the broader adoption of solar energy in a time of rising fuel costs," said Mark Kingsley, chief commercial officer of Trina Solar.Chinese solar equipment manufacturers warned earlier that sanctions could result in a loss of American jobs because US companies are both buyers of Chinese products and suppliers of materials. They said Chinese manufacturers spend some $2 billion a year to buy materials such as polysilicon from US suppliers.Kingsley said Trina buys silicon from Michigan and manufacturing equipment from New Hampshire, plastic and glass from Japan and South Korea and other components from suppliers elsewhere in Asia."These products, by design, are incredibly international," he said. "The vast majority of this value chain is not in China."He said the disputes will ultimately hurt consumers and businesses throughout the solar value chain.With the presidential election drawing near, US President Barack Obama is getting tough on Chinese exports. The US announced it would set up a cross-agency trade enforcement unit to crack down on unfair practices of its trade partners, including China.Question: Make your suggestions to Chinese producers on how to rejectU.S rulingAnswers(20 marks)Case 2Sengoku v. RMC InternationalQuestion:Discuss whether the jury's verdict for Sengoku on trademark infringement should be AFFIRMED.RMC International Ltd., and its officers Michael Resmo and Joseph Malaga, appeal the district court's judgment, following a jury trial, in favor of Sengoku Works Ltd. for trademark and trade dress infringement under the Lanham Act, and breach of contract under California law. RMC had served since 1985 as exclusive United States distributor of kerosene heaters manufactured by Sengoku, a Japanese corporation, and these charges arose in connection with RMC's decision to market kerosene heaters from another source.RMC is an importer of portable kerosene heaters. From 1985 to 1994, it imported and sold exclusively beaters manufactured by Sengoku, pursuant to yearly contracts signed by the parties, These contracts included exclusivity provisions, under which Sengolm appointed RMC its exclusive U.S. distributor, and RMC agreed to distribute only Sengoku manufactured beaters As part of this arrangement, Sengoku sold the heaters to an independent trading company, Zenith & Co., who then sold them to RMC. The RMC/Zenith/ Sungoku heaters bore the trademark "Kerobeat."Under the agreement, RMC handled all of the marketing and advertising for the heaters, and arranged for all of the retailer purchases of the heaters Only RMC's name appeared on the product and packaging, and RMC dealt with all consumer complaints and returns. RMC claims that in the early 1990s it began to experience increasing quality problems with the Sengoku heaters, and increasing customer complaints. When Sengoku did not take satisfactory steps to remedy the problems, m 1993 RMC began to negotiate with Wooshin, a Korean corporation, to manufacture and supply kerosene heaters to RMC.RMC maintains that they had no valid contract with Sengoku for 1994. For the first quarter of 1994, RMC performed as it had for the previous nine years. But in late March Sengoku became aware that RMC was selling heaters to Sengoku's largest U.S. customer that were manufactured by Wooshin, and that bore the Keroheat trademark and closely resembled Sengoku's heaters. Sengoku filed suit against RMC for breaching the exclusivity provision of their contract, and for trademark and trade dress infringement.Sengoku and RMC each claim ownership of the Keroheat trademark. From 1982 to 1985, prior to the Sengoku/RMC agreements, Sengoku heaters bearing the Keroheat mark were sold to a trading company called Imarfiex, and were then sold in the U.S. by C.C.I., a company partially owned by Colt Clark. In 1985, Clark sued Imarflex for breach of contract and trademark infringement, claiming that he owned the Keroheat trademark. After the Sengoku/Imarflex/Clark deal ended, Clark then founded RMC, with Michael Resmo and Joseph Malaga. RMC began selling Sengoku heaters under the Keroheat mark in 1985, and obtained a federal registration of the mark. Clark left RMC in 1992, and now works for Sengoku.In July 1994 the district court granted Sengoku a preliminary injunction to enjoin RMC from selling the Wooshin heater bearing the Keroheat mark. After a seven day jury trial, the jury found for Sengoku on all claims. The jury awarded Sengoku only $1.00 in damages on the trademark infringement claim. The district court then ordered the cancellation of RMC's federal trademark registration for Keroheat, and entered a permanent injunction barring RMC from using the mark. The district court also denied RMC's posttrial motions for judgment as a matter of law and for a new trial. This appeal followed.Answer:(20 marks)Case 3Facts:Japan---Taxes on Alcoholic BeveragesCanada, the European Union, and the United States complained that Japan imposed lower taxes on shochu, a locally produced alcoholic beverage, than it did on imported alcoholic beverages, including vodka, in violation of Article III, paragraph 2, of the 1994 General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade.Question:Discuss whether Japan’s policy of t axing imported vodka at a higher rate than Japanese shochu was a violation of GATT Article IIIAnswer:(20 marks)。