Search results

Investigates the differences in protocols between arbitral tribunals and courts, with particular emphasis on US, Greek and English law. Gives examples of each country and its way of using the law in specific circumstances, and shows the variations therein. Sums up that arbitration is much the better way to gok as it avoids delays and expenses, plus the vexation/frustration of normal litigation. Concludes that the US and Greek constitutions and common law tradition in England appear to allow involved parties to choose their own judge, who can thus be an arbitrator. Discusses e‐commerce and speculates on this for the future.

Looks at the practice of stipulating in international contracts which country’s law should govern any disputes that arise, using a governing‐law clause. Considers the regulations relating to contractual matters of conflict of laws laid down by the 1980 Convention on the Law Applicable to Contractual Obligations, which exclude bills of lading unless they are regarded as non‐negotiable instruments. Outlines the treatment of conflict of laws relating to bills of lading under Greek, US and English law, citing legal cases as examples, and reveals that in all three legal systems the choice of the applicable law, set out in the contract itself, is included in the bill of lading. Uncovers contradictions in the Greek and English approaches to the contractual role of bills of lading, and suggests that a uniform approach must be adopted, following the lead of US legislation, which clearly specifies that the bill of lading is the contract of carriage in which the choice of law is explicitly stated.

E-commerce is gaining popularity across the globe and Mauritian businesses are also increasingly making use of online platforms to engage in cross-border electronic transactions. However, there are several implications arising from online trading which need to be addressed, among which one is the validity of e-contracts. This research will therefore emphasise on two main components of e-contracts: choice of law and the applicable jurisdiction. While Mauritian laws were amended to give effect to digital signatures and e-agreements, there is no extensive or substantive domestic legal provision on choice of law and jurisdiction. Hence, the purpose of this study is to advocate for a greater clarity on the legal framework governing the applicable law and jurisdiction governing a conflict situation in e-contracts, with the view of increasing trust in international e-commerce and to bring in consistency with international commercial relations. This study will be carried out in the Mauritian context by adopting the black letter approach which will analyse the relevant rules and regulations concerning e-contract formation and validity. Additionally, a comparative analysis will be conducted on the legal framework relating to the applicable law and jurisdiction in e-contracts for selected countries: the European Union and the United States. These countries have been chosen for the comparison due to their high involvement in e-commerce and their advanced as well as comprehensive rules on e-commerce.

Presents an updated version of a paper given by the author at an international conference in Athens 2000. Briefly outlines the development of the internet and e‐commerce and the effect of globalization. Considers the potential for the EU to standardize rules and advance its economic integration agenda. Looks at present EU laws in this area. Covers the unicitral model law on electronic commerce, its merits and its problems. Discusses personal jurisdiction under traditional rules and cyberspace transactions. Concludes that existing legislation must be re‐evaluated in the light of technological advances, the need for a more mobile kind of legal person and the worldwide nature of transactions across territorial boundaries, paperless contracts and digital signatures and the use of self‐regulation are also covered.

To explain the Hague Securities Convention in the context of secured financing transactions in the US and to discuss the implications of the Convention on new and existing transactions, as well as on market practice going forward.

This article provides a broad overview of the Hague Securities Convention and the impact of the Convention’s choice of law rules on secured financing transactions in the US involving intermediated securities, including how this deviates from previously applicable laws (such as the Uniform Commercial Code), and provides practical considerations with respect to secured financing transactions.

While in most circumstances the Convention provides for the same choice of law as previously applicable laws, there are certain scenarios where the Convention will produce a different result. Market practice with respect to perfecting security interests will likely change to take account of the Convention and to provide the parties with certainty regarding the law applicable to secured transactions.

The Convention calls for increased diligence with respect to the law governing the account agreement between the debtor and the securities intermediary and whether the securities intermediary has a qualifying office in that jurisdiction.

Practical guidance from experienced finance lawyers.

Most account opening agreements used by US brokerage firms contain a standard predispute arbitration clause requiring customers to submit all disputes relating to the account to arbitration conducted according to the rules of a self‐regulatory organisation. Brokerage firms also routinely place a clause in their customer agreements designating the law which will govern the agreement. Under a rule of the National Association of Securities Dealers (NASD or Association) — IM 3110(f)(4) (Rule 3110(f)(4)) — brokerage firms may not place in a customer agreement ‘any condition which … limits the ability of a party to file any claim in arbitration or limits the ability of the arbitrators to make any award’. This rule places important limitations on the way firms utilise choice‐of‐law clauses. In light of recent legal developments, it is increasingly important for firms to be aware of the issues raised by the rule.

X = multiple interpretations

E‐commerce plays an important role in today’s business environment, and that role will continue to grow each year. eMarketer predicts that by “2004, world wide e‐commerce revenues are expected to total USD 2.7 trillion”. E‐commerce continues to grow in the United States. “The Census Bureau of the Department of Commerce announced today that the estimate of U.S. retail e‐commerce sales for the first quarter of 2004, not adjusted for seasonal, holiday, and trading‐day differences, was $15.5 billion, an increase of 28.1 per cent (±2.9 per cent) from the first quarter of 2003.” “According to a new study by RoperASW and AOL Time Warner, Europeans spent on average EUR430 on line between August and October 2002.” This compares with an average spend of EUR543 per head in the US over the same period.

Aim of the present monograph is the economic analysis of the role of MNEs regarding globalisation and digital economy and in parallel there is a reference and examination of some legal aspects concerning MNEs, cyberspace and e‐commerce as the means of expression of the digital economy. The whole effort of the author is focused on the examination of various aspects of MNEs and their impact upon globalisation and vice versa and how and if we are moving towards a global digital economy.

I. Introduction to the Study of the Economic Role of Government: Alternative Approaches to Law and Economics