LES Chapter 7 2023 with 100% correct questions and answers

Andre Dubai is the CEO of Lacota, a firm headquartered in Portugal. Lacota has acquired 10 companies in the United States. One of the companies is publicly traded on NASDAQ. Lacota does not have the reporting mechanisms, ethics codes, or board structure for its NASDAQ company that are required under U.S. laws for publicly traded companies. Dubai says that he and Lacota have sovereign immunity from U.S. laws. Which of the following is true? a. The courts will not rule on this issue. b. Lacota cannot be forced to comply with U.S. securities laws because U.S. courts have no jurisdiction over it. c. Dubai, Lacota, and their NASDAQ company must comply with U.S. laws. d. Dubai is correct; the business is, for all purposes, located in Portugal. C A U.S. luxury liner was attacked by an Iraqi ship in the Persian Gulf. Many passengers were injured and the ship was damaged. The owner of the ship brought suit in federal district court against the government of Iraq. The suit will: a. be heard because the attack was a violation of international law. b. be heard but only in the International Court of Justice. c. not be heard under the doctrine of sovereign immunity. d. be heard because the attack harmed U.S. citizens. C Italian manufacturers of leather goods have agreed to charge uniform prices on all sales in the United States in order to better compete with U.S. manufacturers. Which of the following statements is true? a. The manufacturers are protected under the act of state doctrine. b. The manufacturers are protected under the forum non conveniens doctrine. c. The manufacturers enjoy sovereign immunity. d. The agreement is a violation of U.S. antitrust laws, and the Italian manufacturers can be prosecuted. D Rich Hasbro is a vice president for Huffy Diapers. He currently heads the African division of this international company. He has just been able to secure approval for sale of Huffy Pull-Ons in the Sudan. When the Pull-Ons arrive at the borders, a customs agent demands an additional $5,000 before he will allow the Pull-Ons into his country. Rich tells the trucking company, "Pay him. I'll reimburse." Which of the following is true? a. Rich has not violated the FCPA because this is a facilitation payment. b. The driver, but not Rich, would be in violation of the FCPA c. Rich has violated the FCPA. d. Rich has not violated the FCPA because a third party made the payment. C Nike and Reebok, the number-one and number-two athletic shoe companies in the United States, could combine to do business: a. outside the U.S. under the Export Trading Company Act. b. either inside or outside the U.S. without violating U.S. antitrust laws. c. inside the U.S. without violating U.S. antitrust laws. d. outside the U.S. but they would risk charges of monopolization. A In the U.S. and England, the laws are built on tradition and precedent and we rely on court interpretation as well as statutory laws. What type of law system is this? a. Common Law. b. Islamic Law. c. Civil Law. d. Code Law. A Mr. Martin is a skilled negotiator in the U.S. However, he has recently been sent to Japan to negotiate a contract with a technology company. During the negotiation, the representatives from the Japanese company have been sitting silently for some time. In a U.S. negotiation, Mr. Martin would rightly interpret that silence as a rejection of the offer. Considering non-statutory international law, what should Mr. Martin do? a. Leave the room in a show of power. b. Consider the silence as rejection and make another offer. c. Consider that the silence might mean something different in that country. d. Instruct the Japanese representatives that they should negotiate in a manner common to U.S. customs. C Taylor works for Megatech, Inc. which is a U.S. company with a production facility in south America. Taylor decided to take some work back to his house which is legal in the U.S. but a violation of the law in the country where he is located. The local authorities arrest him and charge him with theft of company property. Taylor claims that he is a U.S. citizen working for a U.S. owned company and is only subject to U.S. laws. Which of the following is true? a. Taylor is protected by the Sovereign Immunity Doctrine. b. Taylor, as a U.S. citizen is not subject to the laws of the foreign country. c. Taylor is subject to the laws of the foreign country. d. Taylor is protected by the Acts of State Doctrine because what he did was legal in the U.S. C Westfall, Inc. is a U.S. manufacturing company that has a production facility in a small town in eastern Europe. As a result of civil and political unrest, the government of that country has expropriated the Westfall facility. What does this mean? a. The facility has been taken over by the foreign government. b. The U.S. has been given formal control of the facility to protect it from the political problems. c. All the American workers at the foreign facility are replaced with local workers. d. The company now has to pay the foreign government a set percentage of their profits. A RDT, Inc., a U.S. company, is doing business with International Products in Mexico. RDT, Inc. is filing suit against International Products saying that the International Products managers have been cutting quality standards in order to make more profit for themselves. RDT wants the suit tried in the U.S., but the laws in Mexico require the trial to take place there. Whose laws will be followed? a. The lawsuit will not take place until they reach an agreement. b. U.S. law c. A neutral 3rd country such as Canada. d. The law in Mexico. D Johnson worked for Security Agents, Inc. as a security guard at a building in New York City owned by the Abu Dhabi Investment Authority, a sovereign wealth fund owned by the government of Abu Dhabi. While the building was being renovated, Johnson slipped and fell on something "that had been spilled on the floor." Contending that he suffered permanent injuries in the fall, he sued the Abu Dhabi government in tort for his injuries. The district court dismissed the suit, holding that the government was immune due to the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act. Johnson appealed. Does the Act bar his suit? a. Yes, because the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act protects countries and their officials in international business transactions. b. Yes, because the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act states that a sovereign should never be subject to litigation in a foreign court. c. No, because the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act states that countries are not immune from the jurisdiction of foreign courts based on their commercial activities. d. No, because the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act applies to U.S. companies and their agents from bribing foreign officials, not to commercial activities involving foreign nations. C United US Imports, Inc. contracted with a company in Mexico, Grupo Mexico Exports, to buy 20,000 tons of tomatoes. Grupo breached its contract with United and sold its products to another buyer for more money. United could sue Grupo in Mexico, or trying to get Grupo into a U.S. court. United might have reduced dispute resolution difficulties by: a. entering into an agreement with U.S. suppliers since they do not breach their contracts. b. contracting for a smaller quantity of product from the Mexico supplier. c. requiring a conflicts of law clause be placed in its sales agreement. d. relying on World Bank import guarantees. C The Lobster Feast, a commercial fishing vessel out of Alaska and the only asset of Jones & Sons Fishing, sank during a violent storm. During the accident, Stewart, a fisherman on the Lobster Feast, was injured. He sued Jones & Sons for his injuries and was awarded $350,000. Jones & Sons, having no assets, assigned Stewart all rights it had against London Insurance, the London-based insurer of the boat. Stewart took his claim to London Insurance, but it denied the demand and invoked the arbitration process specified in the policy, which called for arbitration of all coverage disputes in London. Stewart then sued, contesting the validity of the arbitration provision. The district court held for London Insurance. Stewart appealed. Does he have a valid claim? a. Yes, because all claims arising in the U.S. are handled by U.S. courts, not courts in a foreign jurisdiction. b. Yes, because the lawsuit was not against London Insurance, but against Jones & Sons. c. No, because his only recourse was against Jones & Sons, not against London Insurance. d. No, because all parties, even assignees, are bound by international arbitration clauses. B the process of converting foreign capital (earned on investments in another country) to domestic currency Repatriation a judicial doctrine that ensures the freedom of one country from being subject to orders from another country Sovereign Immunity a facilitating payment, relatively small in amount, paid to officials to expedite the performance of a duty Grease Payments a criminal statute that prohibits making, authorizing, or promising payments or gifts of money or anything of value to government and NGO officials with the intent to corrupt for the purpose of obtaining or retaining business for or with or directing business Foreign Corrupt Practices Act an agreement among more than two nations Multilateral Treaty