The Japan however does not believe Taiwan in a state to rule this Island. * According to the old records of Imperial Envoy', in early 15th century Chinese and Japanese named the island, Diaoyu by Chinese and Uotsuri by Japanese which means “fishing”. * A book written in 1785 which located in Japan describes this Island as a part of their early kingdoms. * In 1969 the United Nations Economic Commission for Asia and the Far East discovered the oil resources under the sea near the Island. * Once the Island was given back to japan by United State in 1972 the Chinese declared their ownership of the island, the Chinese argues, with documented evidence, that the islands were part of China up until the First Sino-Japanese War.
He authorized the charging of his credit card, The TV Corporation International charged the credit card. Subsequently, The TV Corporation International tried to avoid handing over the domain name to Lim using several pretexts like there was an e-mail error, the minimum bid amount had not been bid for and other such reasons. Issues of Law being raised are accepting to bid on the online auction and paying through the credit card the sum requested by the seller, is there an enforceable contract? Can the seller be sued for breach of contract? Procedural history is the trial court dismissed the case because the court held that since the domain offered and the one accepted were "different' there was no contract formed.
Chapter 11 Cases: all but 11-5 1. Plaintiff: Berardis (Jerry A. Berardi, Betty J. Berardi, and Bentley Corporation) Defendant: Meadowbrook Mall Company Facts: - the Berardis had leased space and did not pay rent in 1990 and Meadowbrook received a lien on a property of the Berardis - a settlement agreement was signed for this issue - Berardis allege that they were forced into the original agreement by duress Issue: Was the 1997 agreement signed under duress? Decision: The Berardis were not under duress when signing the agreement in 1997 and it is therefore enforceable. The decision of the trial court is affirmed. 2.
After our calculations we can say that the Vice President should decide to invest in the ship if the company operates in China, or alternatively if the company, by operating in the US keeps the capsize until the end of its useful life. Briefly, she definitely shouldn’t accept the investment related to the acquisition of the vessel in case it is based in the US and, additionally, wants to sell the ship after 15 years. Summary of Facts : Ocean Carriers Inc. is a shipping Company based in New York and Hong Kong. It possesses and builds capsize dry bulk carriers specialized in the transport of iron ore worldwide. The company does not operate vessels older than 15 years and every 5 years it undertakes a survey (which becomes more and more costly as the vessels get older) to assess the state of the ship.
The administration headquarters is located in Cypress, California which also houses its finance subsidiary Mitsubishi Motors Credit of America (Pedersen, 2004). In 1985, Mitsubishi and Chrysler launched a joint venture called Diamond-Star Motors Corporation and the Illinois towns of Bloomington and Normal were chosen as the site of the Diamond-Star plant, which was to produce subcompact cars using engines and transmissions imported from Mitsubishi’s Japanese facilities. So what products and services do they offer? Mitsubishi
First, they say that it was no intention that brings to the legally binding agreement. But the court held that there was legal intention because it was a commercial transaction and intention was presumed. Another argue by the company said that the ad was just an invitation to treat (not a contract). But the court held that a newspaper advertisement was generally offers to treat, which in other word could be said specifically as an offer. Then, the company also argue that Mrs. Carlill did not make an acceptance or agreement to the offer, as one of a contract element.
The plaintiff agreed to the fact that there was no express contract between the two companies. • The plaintiff’s claims were based on; (1) The principle of Estoppels. (2) The Contract. Issues: • Is the long term good relationship between the two companies considered to be a legal contract between them? • Was there discussion on justification of a contract?
Grant applied for shares in the company and sent a letter of acceptance but it never arrived. The company later went into liquidation and Grant was called upon to pay the amount outstanding on his shares. It was held that he had to do so. There was a contract between the company and himself which was completed when the letter of acceptance was posted, regardless of the fact that it was lost in the post. Bruce and Audley Is there a valid contract between Bruce and Audley?
Ogden claimed that this was true only for goods, not navigation. Gibbons then sued Ogden for entry into the state and the case was appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court. John Marshall ruled in favor of Gibbons, determining that it was within the federal government’s power to control navigation and that the regulation of “commerce” included laws of navigation. Conduction of interstate commerce was a power reserved to Congress, Marshall ruled. I believe that Marshall granted this case cert.