The internal auditors questioned why the two shipments were done before December 31, since the requested dates were in the following year. The shipments had a total value of $150,000.00. Another concern for the internal auditors was that there was no written agreement with United Thermostatic Controls to accept the early shipments and pay for them before they actually needed the merchandise. The internal auditors also discovered that Frank Campbell put pressure on the accountants to record the shipments to show the sales. Their concerns were discussed with
Addressing International Legal and Ethical Issues Simulation Summary July 9,2012 Law 421 David Tiffany What legal issues are similar in the 3 cases? The similarity of legal issues involved in the three cases presented in my opinion would be negligence and establishing legal and ethical liabilities for international transactions across the globe. In the simulation Cadmex is looking to acquire exclusive global market rights to the anti-diabetic agent ProPrez which was established in Candore. The Ionia case is a mixture of criminal conduct as well as negligence, the Jamaican ship falsified the Oil Record Books (ORB) in foreign ports which caused an ethical dilemma(oil pollution). The third case refers to Pfizer’s 1996 case that took place in Northern Nigeria during an epidemic of bacterial meningitis.
To successfully invoke this defense, the purchaser or occupier had to establish that it had no reason to know that the property was contaminated. Since the problem with brownfields is the existence or suspicion of contamination, the defense was largely unavailable to prospective developers or tenants of brownfield sites. To eliminate this obstacle to redevelopment of brownfields, the Brownfield Amendments created the BFPP defense for landowners or tenants who knowingly acquire or lease contaminated property after January 11, 2002. Only those parties that qualify for the BFPP defense are potentially subject to the windfall lien. To qualify for the BFPP, the owner or tenant must establish by a preponderance of the evidence that it has satisfied the following eight conditions: • All disposal of hazardous substances occurred before the purchaser acquired the facility.
Alec Kurger & Ors; George Ernest Bra & Ors v. Commonwealth of Australia In the case of Alec Kruger & Ors; George Ernest Bray & Ors v. Commonwealth of Australia, the plaintiffs sought, among other things, a declaration that the provisions of the 1918 Aboriginals Ordinance were invalid. They contended that the ordinance was contrary to an implied constitutional right to freedom from any law or executive act that, among other things, constituted or authorized the crime of genocide. In support of their case they cited several provisions contained within the Genocide Convention, which they argued were violated by the Aboriginals Ordinance. These included: 1. The removal and transfer of children of a racial or ethnic group in a manner which was calculated to bring
FACTS Fremont Investment & Loan (Fremont) (defendant) initiated a number of subprime, adjusted rate mortgage loans to Massachusetts residents, most of which required an increase in payments after the first two or three years and required no down payment. Many of these loans ended up going into default and Fremont entered into an agreement with the Massachusetts Attorney General (plaintiff), agreeing to consult the Attorney General before foreclosing on any of the loans. The Attorney General ended up objecting to most of the foreclosures and brought a consumer protection enforcement action against Fremont, claiming that in issuing this series of subprime mortgages, Fremont acted unfairly and deceptively in violation of the Massachusetts consumer
In this suit, legal ramifications must be a factor by the different states. Congress has the authorization through this clause to supervise the free flows of trade. Deciding in this case whether or not Congress has a control here is examined. This decision will be made by the court regarding the subject of regulation and how it will be done. According to the Commerce Clause the state statute is unconstitutional because it is a burden on interstate commerce to the state of Confusion.
The defendants, since 1970, had made substantial improvements to the land in dispute. Permission to use the land was never sought from the plaintiffs’ predecessors in title. The plaintiffs asked the defendants to remove the fence once it was discovered that the fence was on the plaintiffs land title, but this request was denied by the defendant. Issue? Whether the land on French Road that is in dispute has been acquired by the defendant through adverse possession?
Case Study 1.2: The A7D Affair Question #4: Do you think Vandivier was wrong to work up the qualification report? Explain the moral principle or principles that underlie your judgment. Dumping refers to the practice of exporting to other countries products that have been banned or declared hazardous in the United States (Shaw, 2011, pg. 43). Based on the
See also the first instance approach of Hughes J in Millward v Oxfordshire County Council [2004] EWHC 455 (QB). A primary difficulty in establishing liability is proving that the breach of duty caused the harm to the Claimant. This is a recurring problem in cases where the breach consists of a failure to provide adequate information or training. As assaults tend to occur quickly and unexpectedly it is difficult to prove that a suitably informed and trained Claimant would not have been assaulted anyway. Longmore LJ in Vaile quoted Toulson LJ at paragraph 28 of the case of Drake v Harbour [2008] ALL ER (D) 283: “Where a Claimant proves both a Defendant was negligent and that loss ensued which was of a kind likely to have resulted from such negligence, this will ordinarily be enough to enable a court to infer that it was probably so caused, even if the Claimant is unable to prove positively the precise mechanism.” In other words, common sense can be applied to the facts of a case and a Claimant can
The Convention is the basic international instrument concerning refugee protection (Gibney, 2010). In contractual countries refugees have the right to be free from penalties that illegal arrival would usually incur providing they declare their presence swiftly and prove to have sufficient reason for fleeing their homeland (Plender, 1988). The convention also states that refugees have the right to be protected against forcible return to their homelands where they may face death or persecution (Department of International Protection, 2010). Among those who do not qualify for refugee status are people who have committed crimes against peace or war crimes against humanity (Plender, 1988). Refugee migrations are a growing global concern (Latif, 2010), with the number of the worlds refugees believed to have nearly doubled over the past two decades, due ongoing