Business Decisions
Not what you're looking for?
ABC is a multinational enterprise (MNE) incorporated in State X. ABC entered into a joint venture agreement with XYZ, an MNE incorporated in State Y, to jointly produce a new line of hydraulic equipment in ABC's new factory in State Z, a developing nation. ABC & XYZ have mutually agreed to have the law of State Y govern any disputes or concerns arising under the joint venture agreement. Shortly after the conclusion of the agreement, a wiring defect in ABC's factory caused it to burn to the ground, killing five tourists in the immediate vicinity who were nationals (citizens) of State Q. XYZ, fearing bad publicity, sued ABC to rescind the joint venture agreement. X,Y, & Z are all common law states, while Q is a civil law jurisdiction.
NOW, CAN YOU ENLIGHTEN ME IF:
1. A criminal case should be filed, also analyze the possible arguments and counter-arguments that counsel for either ABC or XYZ could reasonably make for having the case heard in the municipals courts of:
a. State X
b. State Y
c. State Z
d. State Q
2. Should a civil lawsuit between ABC and XYZ be filed, and also analyze the possible arguments and counter-arguments that counsel for either ABC or XYZ would reasonably make for having the case heard in the municipal courts of:
a. State X
b. State Y
c. State Z
d. State Q
Purchase this Solution
Solution Summary
Business Decisions are discussed very comprehensively in this explanation..
Solution Preview
NOW, CAN YOU ENLIGHTEN ME IF:
1. A criminal case should be filed, also analyze the possible arguments and counter-arguments that counsel for either ABC or XYZ could reasonably make for having the case heard in the municipals courts of:
a. State X
In case of the criminal case, the case should be heard in State X because this is where the defendant has registered its place of business. ABC is the defendant and it is incorporated in the state of X.
The argument against this is that X is not the place where five people were killed and so the case should not be heard in State X. In addition, ABC is not the only defendant, XYX is also a part of the joint venture and so is also a defendant.
b. State Y
The argument that the case should be heard in the State of Y supported by the fact that the joint venture states that any dispute or conflict relating to joint venture should be heard in State Y. The second argument is that this is the state where the plaintiff (XYZ) has its place of business. If the criminal suit is filed by Q or the descendants of Q then State Y is also the state where one defendant XYZ does business.
The argument against is that State ...
Education
- BSc , University of Calcutta
- MBA, Eastern Institute for Integrated Learning in Management
Recent Feedback
- "I read your comments, and thank you for this feedback. Do I need to find other studies that applied this methodology Ive used? That's where I'm stuck at."
- "Thank you kindly sir. "
- "Excellent and well explained. --Thank you kindly. "
- "Awesome notes. I appreciate you."
- "I have the follow-up project and I will assign that to you very soon. "
Purchase this Solution
Free BrainMass Quizzes
Change and Resistance within Organizations
This quiz intended to help students understand change and resistance in organizations
Lean your Process
This quiz will help you understand the basic concepts of Lean.
Academic Reading and Writing: Critical Thinking
Importance of Critical Thinking
Operations Management
This quiz tests a student's knowledge about Operations Management
Understanding Management
This quiz will help you understand the dimensions of employee diversity as well as how to manage a culturally diverse workforce.