In-Depth Case Study: Exploring Complexities in International Trade Law

This case study delves into several international trade law scenarios, examining issues such as offer and acceptance, conditions precedent, and breach of contract. The first case explores whether an offer and acceptance occurred in a proposed engine sale, and whether governmental approval was a condition precedent or subsequent. The second case concerns a contract for the shipment of food produce, focusing on price increases and contractual terms. The third case analyzes a natural gas sale, addressing whether the buyer breached the contract by not obtaining a letter of credit, whether the seller breached, if the contract was avoided, and if the buyer was entitled to lost profits. The analysis provides detailed insights into the complexities of international trade agreements and the legal ramifications of each scenario. Desklib offers this and many other solved assignments for students.

International Trade Law 1
INTERNATIONAL TRADE LAW
Student’s Name
Professor’s Name
Institution
Location of Institution
Course
Date

International Trade Law 2
Case 1
1. Was there an offer?
From the case, there was an offer to sell two or three PW4000 series engines for
installation in a Boeing aircraft. Further, there was an offer to sell two or three PW4000 series
engines for installation in an Airbus aircraft. The offer was in exchange of money which was to
be measured in terms of prices of the various PW4000 series engines.
2. Was there an acceptance?
There was an acceptance of the offer in the contract based on the relevant facts presented
in the case study. A week later after the offer had been made, it is clear that an acceptance letter
was sent by M stating that M had indeed agreed to the offer for the PW4000 series engines.
However, when M was about to pay for the offer sued M arguing that there was a contract which
was existing and that P was involved in the purchase of the items. The intention of M to pay for
the item without involving P can be considered as a breach of contract because M never intended
to involve the other party even though there was an agreement which had been made between the
two.
3. Was the requirement of governmental approval meant to be a condition precedent or
condition subsequent?
The requirement of government approval can be considered as the condition precedent. It
was a condition precedent because the approval was to be done before the acceptance of the
offer. Or rather after the purchase of the PW4000 series engines by both P and M.Both the US
and Hungarian governments were to approve the offer which had been made to P and M.It was
after the approval that the items could be purchased by the parties. Thus it can be said that the

International Trade Law 3
approval was a condition precedent because it was to be done prior to the purchase of the items
by both P and M as was indicated in the contract.
Case Two
There was a contract since there was an offer and acceptance between the two parties that
is C and B.B offered to carry food produce for B using the Viking Express which C
accepted.Additionally,there were certain conditions which were to be fulfilled by the two parties
and this one of the essential elements of any particular contract.B’s standard terms of carriage
was that the rise in price of fuel in the course of the shipment would be passed to the shipper.C
on the other hand,said that the freight charges would not be increased after the conclusion of the
contract.
Case 3
1. Had the buyer breached by not obtaining the letter of credit?
The buyer did not breach the contract by failing to obtain the letter of credit. The letter of
credit was only to be used for the purchase of the natural gas by the buyer. It was not one of the
fundamental elements of the contract which had been made between the seller and the buyer.
Also, the letter of credit was to be provided once the place of loading had been issued by the
seller which was never done. Thus it can be concluded that the buyer did not breach the contract
for failing to obtain the letter of credit.
2. Had the seller breached?
From the case, the seller had indeed breached the contract because one the seller failed to
provide the place of loading to enable for the issue of letter of credit. The seller also breached the
contract by failing to provide the natural gas to the buyer on claims that the US supplier would
not accept to export the gas to a buyer in Belgium. The act was however only meant to raise the

International Trade Law 4
price of the natural gas to the buyer. From the case, a third party purchased the gas from another
source at a price which was slightly high above the normal price, and this compelled the buyer to
sue the seller.
3. Was the contract avoided?
From the case, it can be concluded that the contract was avoided by both the parties.
First, the buyer had accepted to obtain a letter of credit which was to be used as a means of
payment. However, he failed to do so requesting for the place of loading. The seller, on the other
hand, had accepted to provide the place of loading the letter of credit but he never did that.
Furthermore, the contract can be concluded to have been avoided when the seller claimed that
supplier located in the US had declined to export the natural gas to a buyer in Belgium and this
was a means of avoiding the contract.
4. Was the buyer entitled to lost profits?
Based on the case, the buyer was never entitled to the lost profits. One, the buyer did not
purchase the natural gas. Instead, it was the third party who had purchased the natural gas from
another supplier at an additional price of 141,131. Additionally, the buyer had avoided the
damages and contract by failing to provide the letter of credit which was to be used for the
purchase of the natural gas, therefore he or she was never entitled to the lost profits.