Search results

This paper aims to explore the role of public and private international law and how they are used differently in regulation of global markets. Data were sourced from both primary and secondary materials – journal papers, court decisions, textbooks and international legal instruments to gain insights into the role of law and the varied contexts in which it is used in regulation of markets. In an ordinary sense of the word, law sets operational limits to protect normative values and practices in a state – trade, peace, security, just to mention but a few. However, law cannot be confined to deterring undesired behaviours or to settling disputes, but more importantly, a good law should prevent disputes from happening. Law dictates the way of life of a society and its efficacy often depends on how well it is used to order the proper functioning of the system. International law is the set of rules which govern and foster effective relations of states. The paper explores the chasm between public and private international law, with a view to demonstrate how they are used differently in regulation of markets. Public and private international law encompass norms evolved by multilateral treaties, customs, judicial decisions, model laws and soft law instruments by different oversight bodies governing states and other stakeholders in their relationship with each other. These norms/rules create a platform for interstate cooperation on varied regulatory issues of shared interests. While treaties create a uniform framework of rules in all signatory states, their implementation often depends on individual states willingness to transpose them into national law. Owing to the inherent challenges of public international law (interstate practice), it has become imperative for markets to use rules of private international law. While public regulates the relationship of states and their emanation, private international law helps to bridge gaps in the mainstream international legal systems of states and in so doing enhances their co-existence on overlapping regulatory issues. The engendered trans-national norms will over time generate a positive impact on local sustainability and co-existence of different regulatory domains.

This paper uses cases studies and experiences of countries to demonstrate the complimentary relationship of public and private international law and how they work in tandem in international legal practice. The paper has also used the varied experiences of states to demonstrate how public and private international law interact in regulation of global markets. Data were sourced from both primary and secondary sources – journal papers, court decisions, textbooks and international legal instruments – to gain insights into the law and the varied contexts in regulation of markets. The case law and experience of states alluded to undertaking this research reflect the complimentary relationship of states for markets to operate effectively.

The findings of the paper comport with the hypothesis that markets cannot effectively work unless they are pursued within the framework of rules of public and private international law. The paper has alluded to the experience in national jurisdictions and global to highlight the chasm between different regulatory domains for markets to operate effectively. The paper articulates important practical issues relating to public and private international law in regulations of markets.

The practical implication of the paper is that it underscores significant legal issues relating to regulation of markets drawing examples within national jurisdictions and globally.

The paper has social implications because markets affect people, jobs and social life in varied ways. It addresses pertinent issues related to the complementarity of public and private international law and how they are manifested in national jurisdictions.

The paper is original because it nuances the interrelationship of public and private international law, teasing out their interaction in regulation of global markets in a distinctive way.

The purpose of the paper was to examine the challenges inherent in harnessing the UN and other AML counter‐measures, paying particular attention to the United Nations Resolutions on countering financing of terrorism and why the UN Security Resolutions have not been easy to invoke. As regards other AML counter‐measures, the paper examined the legal status of soft law instruments, articulating the possible reasons why they are easy to implement.

The paper was written by the analysis of UN and other AML counter‐measures – which were evaluated in the gaze of how they have been implemented across states. While states are under an obligation to implement UN AML counter‐measures such as international treaties and soft law instruments, private banks as non‐state actors have exploited some loopholes in the law to flaunt them. This has undermined the efficacy of global AML counter‐measures. Many banks have been fined for violating UN sanctions on countries like Iran and Sudan. These examples were utilized in appraising the current UN and other AML counter‐measures across states.

The findings of the paper were compelling in demonstrating that global anti‐money laundering laws are often emasculated by the fact that they are implemented in the realm of international law. International law manifests itself within independent member states' vested strategic self‐interests. In the event of conflicts, national self‐interests will prevail. But again, money laundering is an opportunistic crime because it generates both synergies and externalities and the response of individual states often depends on how it is affected by it. It is wrong to assume as doing things in the realm of international law is not as easy as it is presumed to be.

It would have been better to carry out interviews so as to corroborate secondary data sources used in writing this paper. But due to some constraints, this option was not possible. It would also have been better to undertake the analysis of data based on a large sample of countries rather than cherry picking. While implementing AML counter‐measures in the realm of international law is necessary to foster international co‐operation, there are still some loopholes that need to be paid more attention.

The paper was written, analysed and evaluated based on the most recent literature on implementation of UN and other AML counter‐measures across countries. It also utilized the recent cases involving violations of UN AML counter‐measures by banks on sanctioned countries such as Iran and Sudan.

This paper aims to study an advanced third/fourth party logistics (3/4PL) relationship in which the logistics service provider extended normal services by taking ownership of the goods during global distribution. It also aims to describe and analyze the approach to the legal rules a 3/4PL provider and its client company took in their contract, and present some remarks on the extent to which these contract solutions are legally sound.

A cross‐functional (business law and logistics) approach is applied to a single case study. The main data source is a written contract, complemented by in‐depth interviews with the 3/4PL's managing director. A legal analysis is made from four perspectives of non‐mandatory and mandatory commercial legal rules.

Issues between the offered service, the legal function and reaction in contracts are pointed out, e.g. doubts regarding the legal risk of sales uncertainty, the ownership of goods, the product liability, and the roles as commercial agent and as freight forwarding agent. These kinds of advanced logistics services are not clearly handled, e.g. in the standard‐form contracts for freight forwarding.

The research is limited to one case and to some aspects of Swedish commercial law, but put in an international perspective. It adds a legal perspective to previous studies on 3/4PL contracts, and it contributes to legal research by its analysis of how firms in real life react to law in their contracts.

Practitioners can get inspiration from an innovative logistics service setup, but also realize what legal challenges to consider when they make their contracts. A tentative approach to aligning logistics' and lawyers' work is suggested.

The paper combines legal and logistics research, and description/analysis of a 3/4PL case where ownership of the goods is transferred to the service provider.

Cross border trade, involving different business environments between the sellers’ and buyers’ countries, may result in conflicts because of asymmetry in the information structure across the borders. The International Chambers of Commerce (ICC) has laid down ground rules on terms of shipment and payment, enabling harmonization and standardization of business process, and fixing of responsibilities for international trade. The international commercial (INCO) terms by ICC define the duties, obligations and cost borne by the exporter and the importer. An exporter’s uncertainty looms once the goods cross his/her border. Therefore, there is a need for a smart contract that is secured, transparent, legitimate and trustworthy. The authors propose a blockchain technology-based smart global contract (BTGC) framework for international trade.

In this paper, the authors develop the framework based on value chain analysis (VCA) of international trade and an ontology-driven-blockchain-design approach. The paper analyzes the sequence of activities in the value chain of global trade, the terms of the contract, the data structure templates, the validation rules and the points-of-failure, and proposes the smart contract blockchain structure.

This paper proposes the BTGC framework considering the INCO terms 2020; it provides the validation rules and the probability of failures; and identifies the elements that cause the halting of contracts and conditions of creation of side blockchains. The framework also includes the governance of the BTGC system.

The proposed framework not only has implications at the firm level as it automates and secures a global sale contract but also is expected to harmonize the global-trade process as well. The developers may use the attributes, data structure templates and the rules identified in this paper for developing the GC software. Future research may consider using case analysis, class diagrams and the related steps for developing the blockchain software.

This paper proposes a complete value chain of global contract (GC) concerning exports, an ontology of GC and a blockchain-based smart-contract framework based on global standards. Besides, it specifies the elements of fraud (such as the non-integration of side chains) and uncertainty, i.e. the probability of failures. Such a framework will harmonize the global-trade process and build an international standards for smart GC based on blockchain technology (ISSGCBT), which is not yet done.

The purpose of this paper is to better understand how commercial contracts are interpreted and the level of control that contracting parties have over the judicial interpretation of their contracts.

The paper approaches the subject of commercial contract interpretation through an analysis of four dichotomies debated in legal scholarship and found in judicial decisions. The four dichotomies are formalism versus realism, literalism versus contextualism, facilitation versus regulation, and rules versus standards.

The main finding of the paper is that both poles of each of the dichotomies play important roles in the interpretation and enforcement of commercial contracts. For example, contract interpretation characterized by a high degree of formalism looks to the four‐corners of the contract for interpretive answers. In turn, some courts make use of external factors – such as distributive justice or public policy concerns in interpreting contracts.

One of the research implications of the paper is the need for a more in‐depth analysis of how contracting parties may agree on how their contracts are to be interpreted and whether courts should be obligated to enforce party‐mandated rules of interpretation.

The practical implication of understanding the means and methods of contract interpretation is that it leads to a better understanding of commercial contracts in transborder transactions.

The value of this research lies upon the fundamental premise that the same philosophies and theories of interpretation found in most legal systems are replicated in the area of international commercial contracting.

The article starts from the examination of the reasons of the recent trends towards legal integration and gives a brief overview on the system to pursue the objective of legal integration. Then the major form of legal integration in the African continent ‐ the OHADA ‐ is taken into consideration by giving the main features of this legal harmonization process. The article further focuses on the possibility of reaching harmonization of the legal rules on telecommunications in the countries belonging to the OHADA. The paper also presents the reasons in favour of such legal harmonization, the possible obstacles that can be faced, and suggests some hints for the drafting process of the possible future uniform act.

EU competition policy may be explained as a system: an organized set of objectives, rules, functions, procedures and authorities, acting in unity. A system is a complex reality, immersed in a complex context and permanently changing to overcome its dysfunctionalities and to adapt itself to environmental challenges. Globalization is its major challenge today. This paper proposes to understand globalization from four viewpoints. EU competition policy should respond to an evolutionary, contradictory, relative and systemic globalization. The aim of this paper is to identify the responses adopted in order to react to all these different dimensions of globalization.