Jurisdiction and Applicable Law in Global Trade: A Case Study Analysis

This case study examines a dispute between AT Inc. and PMC involving electronic parts purchased from Canada. The core issues revolve around jurisdiction and the applicable law, given conflicting clauses in the contract. The analysis considers how US federal courts would rule, particularly regarding the application of Canadian law versus California law. It explores the principle of party autonomy in determining applicable laws and contrasts outcomes under Canadian law and the international conventions on the sale of goods (CISG). Furthermore, the study highlights key differences between common law and civil law systems, specifically concerning the right to cure and open price contracts. Desklib provides similar solved assignments and past papers for students.

Running head: GLOBAL TRADE LAW 1
Global Trade Law
Name
Institution

GLOBAL TRADE LAW 2
Global Trade Law
a) Given the fact that AT Inc. claimed that they were issued with electronics parts that did
not meet their requirements, the US federal court would interpret make a ruling according
to the laws of Canada. If AT Inc. is granted its wish to have the case transferred to the
State court, then the court would be mandated to give its ruling in accordance to the
Canadian law as stated in the product. The state court would rely on the seller’s
obligation under the Canadian laws in relation to the description as well as the quality of
goods. In this common law province, the term implies that the products should be of
merchant quality, particularly at the time the goods are bought while the seller acts in the
course of the business. On the other hand, the court would, therefore, have the case be
heard in the state court and interpret the Canadian law as stated in the item.
b) Determining the applicable laws, in this case, would hugely rely on the principle of party
autonomy as the primary choice of Laws rule in the defined contract of the sold goods
(Moore, 2017). Notably, this principle is often applicable where the decision of law
implied by both the involved parties of a specific contract is taken as a matter of fact.
This is to be treated as a connecting factor in the case that refers to all the necessary
contractual questions to the laws that are chosen by the two parties (Moore, 2017).
Consequently, this means that the function of the parties’ intentions is only assumed to be
just a matter of fact, which by the choice-of-laws rule, is a connecting factor to the
specified or rather the chosen law. In this manner, the parties do not in any way possess
an autonomous legislative ability; instead, they are only allowed to determine the code
(Kalisz, 2017). The choice of law clause must, therefore, be legal instead of being

GLOBAL TRADE LAW 3
contrary to the order of public particularly of the lex fori (Moore, 2017). This means that
under the Canadian law, PMC will prevail. However, if the international conventions on
the sale of goods were applicable, AT Inc. would prevail in this case. Notably, this is
because, under the international convention law, the principle regarding party autonomy
is entirely recognized.
c) Common laws system is often used by countries that were former British colonies or
rather protectorate which includes the United States. On the other hand, the civil law
system is mainly followed by countries that are regarded to be former French, Dutch,
German, Spanish or rather Portuguese colonies. Under the common law, a seller is
guaranteed right to cure (Bauböck, 2018). In this case, the sell is often allowed to put
defective contracts right long after the day of performance in case the cure is possible
without any delay. On the other hand, civil law does not guarantee the seller the right to
cure. The civil law does not provide an open price contract while the under the common
law order is only valid if and just if the price of the deal is fixed or instead contain at least
a particular method of payment (Kadner, 2017).

GLOBAL TRADE LAW 4
References
Bauböck, R. (2018). What is wrong with selling citizenship? It corrupts democracy!. In Debating
Transformations of National Citizenship (pp. 37-41). Springer, Cham.
Kadner Graziano, T. (2017). The Hague solution on choice-of-law clauses in conflicting standard
terms: paving the way to more legal certainty in international commercial
transactions?. Uniform Law Review, 22(2), 351-368.
Kalisz, B. G. K. V. (2017). Mixing Legal Systems in Europe; the Role of Common Law
Transplants (Polish Law Example). European Review of Private Law, 25(4), 789-812.
Moore, S. F. (2017). Certainties undone: fifty turbulent years of legal anthropology, 1949–1999.
In Ethnography and Law (pp. 3-24). Routledge.