2026
BUSINESS LAW II
PRACTICE Q & A
KOEN HANEGREEFS
VUB
, Chapter 1: What is Business Law?
A. Syllabus Guiding Questions
Q: What is the legal definition of "law" and why does it matter to business?
A: Law is a body of rules, enforceable by government, that regulates conduct in society. For
business it produces stability and predictability: firms can structure transactions, plan
investments, and enforce contracts knowing an independent authority will uphold agreed rules.
Without law, commercial exchange depends on trust alone, dramatically raising transaction costs.
Exam tip: Link "stability and predictability" directly to commercial activity.
Q: How does law evolve, and what forces drive that evolution?
A: Law evolves as the moral values and cultural norms of society change. Historical milestones:
nomadic customs -> Code of Hammurabi (lex talionis) -> Greek democracy -> Roman/Justinian
Code (533 AD) -> early English common law (post-1066) -> Napoleonic Code (1804) -> modern
statutory law. Key drivers: shifting morality, economic change, technological development, and
political reform. Law can lag social change ("behind the times"), creating compliance and
reputational risk for businesses that track only current statutes rather than evolving public
expectations.
Exam tip: The Hyundai Georgia and Nazi Germany examples both show how morality and local legal
environment shape business decisions.
Q: What is the difference between Common Law and Civil Law systems?
A: Common Law (Anglo-Saxon, post-1066): built on accumulated judicial decisions (precedent);
judges actively develop law case-by-case; prior rulings are binding via Stare Decisis. Example
jurisdictions: USA, UK, Australia, Canada, Singapore. Civil Law (Roman-Germanic; Justinian Code
533 AD; Napoleonic Code 1804): built on comprehensive written codes; judges apply the code and
do not create law; prior decisions are persuasive but not formally binding. Example jurisdictions:
France, Germany, Belgium, Netherlands, Japan, Brazil. For an international business the distinction
matters because: (a) advertisements may or may not constitute offers; (b) acceptance timing differs
(mailbox vs. receipt rule); (c) consideration is required in common law but not in civil law (causa
suffices); (d) remedies for breach differ (anticipatory breach vs. Nachfrist).
Exam tip: Be ready to name five jurisdictions for each system and one practical business consequence.
1
Koen Hanegreefs | VUB
, Q: What is Stare Decisis and how does it create predictability for business?
A: Stare Decisis (Latin: "stand by the decision") requires courts to follow prior rulings of higher
courts within the same jurisdiction. A US Supreme Court ruling binds all lower federal and state
courts. Predictability: firms can read prior cases to forecast how a dispute will be decided and
structure transactions accordingly. Departure is possible only by the highest court overruling its
own prior decision (rare) or by a lower court "distinguishing" the facts. Civil Law achieves the same
goal of predictability through the code text rather than precedent.
Exam tip: Contrast with Civil Law: both systems aim at predictability but through different mechanisms.
Q: What is Conflict of Laws (Private International Law)? When does it arise?
A: Conflict of Laws is a set of procedural rules that determine which legal system and jurisdiction's
substantive law applies to a dispute involving a foreign element. It arises whenever a transaction or
dispute has connections to more than one legal system. The Yahoo! case is the paradigm example:
a US website hosted on US servers was accessible in France where the content was illegal,
triggering the question of which law governed.
Exam tip: Know the term "case of first impression" from Yahoo! -- used when no prior ruling exists on a point.
Q: What are the sources of international law?
A: The four primary sources: (1) international conventions and treaties (UN Charter, WTO
Agreements, Paris Agreement -- binding on signatory states); (2) customary international law --
general practice accepted as law (Polluter Pays Principle recognised by the ICJ); (3) widely
accepted general principles of law recognised by civilised nations; (4) subsidiary sources also used
in national law -- judicial decisions of international courts and scholarly writings.
Exam tip: List all four sources in order; the Paris Agreement and London Protocol (Ch. 23) are concrete exam
examples.
Q: How does the US 1st Amendment framework treat hate speech differently from German/EU
law?
A: US: The 1st Amendment creates near-absolute protection for speech; government cannot
regulate content based on viewpoint. Hate speech is protected unless it meets the "imminent
lawless action" test (Brandenburg v. Ohio, 1969) or the "fighting words" doctrine (Chaplinsky v. New
Hampshire, 1942). Underlying value: liberty ("marketplace of ideas"). Germany/EU: Basic Law Art. 1
makes human dignity inviolable; StGB ss130 (Volksverhetzung) criminalises public incitement to
hatred; EU DSA (2022) imposes active content-moderation obligations on platforms with >45
million EU users regardless of where they are established. Underlying value: dignity (post-WWII
constitutional design). Practical consequence: identical content may be fully protected in the US
but criminal in Germany/EU, forcing multinationals to build geo-targeted moderation systems.
2
Koen Hanegreefs | VUB
, Exam tip: Know the four categories of unprotected US speech (fighting words, incitement, defamation,
obscenity) and contrast with EU DSA and German NetzDG.
Q: What is the Digital Services Act (DSA) and why does it matter for non-EU platforms?
A: The DSA (Regulation 2022/2065) replaced the eCommerce Directive 2000 and imposes
mandatory content-moderation obligations on "Very Large Online Platforms" (VLOPs) with more
than 45 million monthly EU users, regardless of the platform's country of establishment. VLOPs
must review and remove illegal content, conduct annual risk assessments, submit to independent
audits, and face suspension of EU operations for non-compliance. For a US platform like Meta,
TikTok, or X, the DSA creates direct regulatory risk in the EU for content that would be fully
protected speech under the 1st Amendment -- effectively solving the enforcement gap that the
French court could not close in Yahoo! (2001).
Exam tip: The DSA is the modern legislative answer to Yahoo! -- know this link explicitly.
Q: How does international law impact daily life? Give three concrete examples from the
course materials.
A: (1) Driving in another country (#31): international agreements make national driver's licences
valid across borders -- enabling free movement for work and travel without retesting. (2) Free
movement within the EU (#39): the Schengen Agreement allows travel and work across EU borders
without passports or visas -- enabling student jobs across Belgium, Netherlands, and Luxembourg.
(3) Safer cross-border investment (#82): international securities regulation frameworks make it
safer to invest in foreign equity markets, enabling individuals to acquire shares in overseas
companies with legal protections.
Exam tip: Items #31, #39, and #82 from the homework reading are explicitly flagged in the slides -- memorise
the numbers and substance.
B. Case-Study / Applied Hypothetical Questions
Q: Yahoo! Inc. v. LICRA (2000-01): What were the key facts and what did the US court hold?
A: Yahoo! operated a US auction website allowing third parties to list Nazi memorabilia. Under
French Penal Code provisions, displaying or selling Nazi ideology items is a civil and criminal
offence. French NGO LICRA obtained a French court order requiring Yahoo! to block French users'
access to those listings. Yahoo! sued in US federal court, arguing the order was unenforceable in
the US. The US District Court held in Yahoo!'s favour (2001): a foreign court order that would compel
a US company to violate the 1st Amendment is not enforceable in the United States under the
public-policy exception to Conflict of Laws. The case was a "case of first impression" -- no prior
ruling had addressed whether a foreign country could regulate content on a US internet platform.
Exam tip: Three issues in one case: Conflict of Laws + internet jurisdiction + 1st Amendment vs. EU hate-
speech law. Know all three angles.
3
Koen Hanegreefs | VUB
BUSINESS LAW II
PRACTICE Q & A
KOEN HANEGREEFS
VUB
, Chapter 1: What is Business Law?
A. Syllabus Guiding Questions
Q: What is the legal definition of "law" and why does it matter to business?
A: Law is a body of rules, enforceable by government, that regulates conduct in society. For
business it produces stability and predictability: firms can structure transactions, plan
investments, and enforce contracts knowing an independent authority will uphold agreed rules.
Without law, commercial exchange depends on trust alone, dramatically raising transaction costs.
Exam tip: Link "stability and predictability" directly to commercial activity.
Q: How does law evolve, and what forces drive that evolution?
A: Law evolves as the moral values and cultural norms of society change. Historical milestones:
nomadic customs -> Code of Hammurabi (lex talionis) -> Greek democracy -> Roman/Justinian
Code (533 AD) -> early English common law (post-1066) -> Napoleonic Code (1804) -> modern
statutory law. Key drivers: shifting morality, economic change, technological development, and
political reform. Law can lag social change ("behind the times"), creating compliance and
reputational risk for businesses that track only current statutes rather than evolving public
expectations.
Exam tip: The Hyundai Georgia and Nazi Germany examples both show how morality and local legal
environment shape business decisions.
Q: What is the difference between Common Law and Civil Law systems?
A: Common Law (Anglo-Saxon, post-1066): built on accumulated judicial decisions (precedent);
judges actively develop law case-by-case; prior rulings are binding via Stare Decisis. Example
jurisdictions: USA, UK, Australia, Canada, Singapore. Civil Law (Roman-Germanic; Justinian Code
533 AD; Napoleonic Code 1804): built on comprehensive written codes; judges apply the code and
do not create law; prior decisions are persuasive but not formally binding. Example jurisdictions:
France, Germany, Belgium, Netherlands, Japan, Brazil. For an international business the distinction
matters because: (a) advertisements may or may not constitute offers; (b) acceptance timing differs
(mailbox vs. receipt rule); (c) consideration is required in common law but not in civil law (causa
suffices); (d) remedies for breach differ (anticipatory breach vs. Nachfrist).
Exam tip: Be ready to name five jurisdictions for each system and one practical business consequence.
1
Koen Hanegreefs | VUB
, Q: What is Stare Decisis and how does it create predictability for business?
A: Stare Decisis (Latin: "stand by the decision") requires courts to follow prior rulings of higher
courts within the same jurisdiction. A US Supreme Court ruling binds all lower federal and state
courts. Predictability: firms can read prior cases to forecast how a dispute will be decided and
structure transactions accordingly. Departure is possible only by the highest court overruling its
own prior decision (rare) or by a lower court "distinguishing" the facts. Civil Law achieves the same
goal of predictability through the code text rather than precedent.
Exam tip: Contrast with Civil Law: both systems aim at predictability but through different mechanisms.
Q: What is Conflict of Laws (Private International Law)? When does it arise?
A: Conflict of Laws is a set of procedural rules that determine which legal system and jurisdiction's
substantive law applies to a dispute involving a foreign element. It arises whenever a transaction or
dispute has connections to more than one legal system. The Yahoo! case is the paradigm example:
a US website hosted on US servers was accessible in France where the content was illegal,
triggering the question of which law governed.
Exam tip: Know the term "case of first impression" from Yahoo! -- used when no prior ruling exists on a point.
Q: What are the sources of international law?
A: The four primary sources: (1) international conventions and treaties (UN Charter, WTO
Agreements, Paris Agreement -- binding on signatory states); (2) customary international law --
general practice accepted as law (Polluter Pays Principle recognised by the ICJ); (3) widely
accepted general principles of law recognised by civilised nations; (4) subsidiary sources also used
in national law -- judicial decisions of international courts and scholarly writings.
Exam tip: List all four sources in order; the Paris Agreement and London Protocol (Ch. 23) are concrete exam
examples.
Q: How does the US 1st Amendment framework treat hate speech differently from German/EU
law?
A: US: The 1st Amendment creates near-absolute protection for speech; government cannot
regulate content based on viewpoint. Hate speech is protected unless it meets the "imminent
lawless action" test (Brandenburg v. Ohio, 1969) or the "fighting words" doctrine (Chaplinsky v. New
Hampshire, 1942). Underlying value: liberty ("marketplace of ideas"). Germany/EU: Basic Law Art. 1
makes human dignity inviolable; StGB ss130 (Volksverhetzung) criminalises public incitement to
hatred; EU DSA (2022) imposes active content-moderation obligations on platforms with >45
million EU users regardless of where they are established. Underlying value: dignity (post-WWII
constitutional design). Practical consequence: identical content may be fully protected in the US
but criminal in Germany/EU, forcing multinationals to build geo-targeted moderation systems.
2
Koen Hanegreefs | VUB
, Exam tip: Know the four categories of unprotected US speech (fighting words, incitement, defamation,
obscenity) and contrast with EU DSA and German NetzDG.
Q: What is the Digital Services Act (DSA) and why does it matter for non-EU platforms?
A: The DSA (Regulation 2022/2065) replaced the eCommerce Directive 2000 and imposes
mandatory content-moderation obligations on "Very Large Online Platforms" (VLOPs) with more
than 45 million monthly EU users, regardless of the platform's country of establishment. VLOPs
must review and remove illegal content, conduct annual risk assessments, submit to independent
audits, and face suspension of EU operations for non-compliance. For a US platform like Meta,
TikTok, or X, the DSA creates direct regulatory risk in the EU for content that would be fully
protected speech under the 1st Amendment -- effectively solving the enforcement gap that the
French court could not close in Yahoo! (2001).
Exam tip: The DSA is the modern legislative answer to Yahoo! -- know this link explicitly.
Q: How does international law impact daily life? Give three concrete examples from the
course materials.
A: (1) Driving in another country (#31): international agreements make national driver's licences
valid across borders -- enabling free movement for work and travel without retesting. (2) Free
movement within the EU (#39): the Schengen Agreement allows travel and work across EU borders
without passports or visas -- enabling student jobs across Belgium, Netherlands, and Luxembourg.
(3) Safer cross-border investment (#82): international securities regulation frameworks make it
safer to invest in foreign equity markets, enabling individuals to acquire shares in overseas
companies with legal protections.
Exam tip: Items #31, #39, and #82 from the homework reading are explicitly flagged in the slides -- memorise
the numbers and substance.
B. Case-Study / Applied Hypothetical Questions
Q: Yahoo! Inc. v. LICRA (2000-01): What were the key facts and what did the US court hold?
A: Yahoo! operated a US auction website allowing third parties to list Nazi memorabilia. Under
French Penal Code provisions, displaying or selling Nazi ideology items is a civil and criminal
offence. French NGO LICRA obtained a French court order requiring Yahoo! to block French users'
access to those listings. Yahoo! sued in US federal court, arguing the order was unenforceable in
the US. The US District Court held in Yahoo!'s favour (2001): a foreign court order that would compel
a US company to violate the 1st Amendment is not enforceable in the United States under the
public-policy exception to Conflict of Laws. The case was a "case of first impression" -- no prior
ruling had addressed whether a foreign country could regulate content on a US internet platform.
Exam tip: Three issues in one case: Conflict of Laws + internet jurisdiction + 1st Amendment vs. EU hate-
speech law. Know all three angles.
3
Koen Hanegreefs | VUB
