国际商法Chapter 3.ppt

3-31 Case 3-6Int. Assoc. of Machinists v. OPEC IAM sued OPEC for anti-trust violations arising out of OPEC’s price-setting activities. 3-32 Case 3-6IAM v. OPEC (cont.) IAM alleged deliberate price-fixing and sought injunctive relief. The OPEC countries refused to recognize the court’s jurisdiction. The court relied upon the act of state doctrine as stated in Underhill v. Hernandez, 168 U.S. 250 (1897): Every sovereign State is bound to respect the independence of every other sovereign State, and the courts of one country will not sit in judgment on the acts of the government of another done within its own territory. Despite commercial activity, the court refused to enter the delicate area of foreign relations and dismissed the action. 3-33 Choosing the Governing Law Private rights acquired under the laws of foreign states will be respected and enforced in our courts. In deciding which laws to apply to a dispute, a court will follow choice of law rules to determine if they should apply their own law or the law of another state. 3-34 Choosing the Governing Law Choice of law is a two-step procedure: If the parties agree to application of the laws of a certain state, that law will apply. If no agreement on choice of law, the court will: Follow statutory dictates Determine which state has the most significant relationship with the dispute, or See which state has the greatest interest in the outcome. 3-35 Choosing the Governing Law:Agreement of the Parties By using a choice of law clause in an agreement, the parties agree in advance as to what law should apply to any dispute that arises. Parties may agree by their statements to a court or by stating their position in pleadings. On rare occasions, courts will infer the intention of the parties as to choice of law based upon their actions. Court will most always skip over this option and look to statutory provisions. 3-36 Choosing the Governing L