Bus 430 entire course ( international business law ) complete course

BUS 430 Entire Course ( International Business Law ) Complete Course To Buy this Class Copy & paste below link in your Brower http://homeworklance.com/downloads/bus-430-entire-course-international-business-law-completecourse/ Or Visit Our Website Visit : http://homeworklance.com Email Us : lancehomework@gmail.com

BUS 430 Entire Course ( International Business Law ) Complete Course BUS 430 Week 1 DQ 1 What are some differences when doing business internationally opposed to domestically? How do international business risks differ from domestic business risk? What factors influence these risks?

BUS 430 Week 1 DQ2 Why do corporations need to be concerned with human rights issues when conducting business internationally? Who are corporations accountable to – the government of their home country, the host country, investors, or the public? What is the rationale for your answer?

BUS 430 Week 1 Individual Assignment Comparative Law Worksheet BUS 430 Week 2 Course Description BUS 430 Week 2 DQ1 What is the Conventions on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods (CISG)? What is the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC)? In what ways is the coverage of the CISG and the UCC similar or different? Explain your answer.

BUS 430 Week 2 DQ2 You work for an international furniture company. Your company has customers in England, Mexico, Guatemala, and China. How would you evaluate the credit worthiness of firms in these countries? How does the credit risk differ between these countries? Would you sell to a company in these countries without a letter of credit? Explain why or why not.

BUS 430 Week 2 Individual Assignment International Law Memo BUS 430 Week 3 Course Description BUS 430 Week 3 DQ1 What are the basic principles of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT)? What are the basic principles behind the World Trade Organization (WTO)? In what ways are GATT and the WTO similar or different? How do the WTO and GATT settle disputes? Provide examples.

BUS 430 Week 3 DQ2 Ressorp, Inc. in Japan agreed to sell 700 television sets to Reardon, a wholesaler, in the United States for US$ 144,417.00. Ressorp, Inc. and Reardon expressly agreed that Reardon would not pay for the television sets until Reardon both received and sold the merchandise in the United States. They also agreed that the merchandise would be shipped CPT Portstown in the United States and that Incoterms 2010 would govern. Ressorp, Inc. arranged to ship the goods with Oceanic Carriers, whose place of business is located in Beachtown, Japan. Ressorp, Inc. loaded the goods from its warehouse into a trailer and delivered the trailer to Oceanic’s freight depot in Beachtown. Several days later, the trailer was discovered to be missing and then it was found abandoned and empty. Reardon, the buyer, then sued Oceanic Carriers. The carrier challenged Reardon’s standing (right) to sue claiming that the original contract said Reardon had no liability to pay for the merchandise until after it was received and sold by Reardon. Therefore, Oceanic Carriers argued, it was the seller, Ressorp, Inc. who should have brought the suit, not Reardon. Is Oceanic correct? Explain why or why not.

BUS 430 Week 3 DQ3 The Jolly Canning Co. in Hawaii agreed to sell 10,000 cases of canned green beans to the Merry Produce Co. in New York. The terms were FOB Bigport in Hawaii. The parties agreed that the governing rules were Incoterms 2010. Jolly, by mistake, delivered 10,000 cases of canned corn to the carrier in Bigport. Moreover, the bill of lading clearly stated that goods were canned corn.

While the goods were in transit, they were damaged by seawater because of the carrier’s negligence. Jolly sues the carrier, but the carrier challenges Jolly’s standing (right) to sue. The carrier claims that the risk of loss had passed to Merry Produce (the consignee on the bill of lading) as soon as the goods had passed the ship’s rail. Is the carrier correct? Should Jolly’s suit be dismissed? Explain why or why not.

BUS 430 Week 3 Learning Team Assignment Case Study Presentation

BUS 430 Week 4 Course Description

BUS 430 Week 4 DQ1 Describe the benefits and detriments of the EU and U. S. rules regarding jurisdiction and forum in privately enforced competition laws. What are the advantages and disadvantages, from the perspective of competition law, in having a wholly foreign subsidiary in Europe?

BUS 430 Week 4 DQ2 Are the actions undertaken by the companies or individuals in the following scenarios legal or illegal pursuant to U. S. law? Please explain each of your answers.

1. A wire transfer of $200,000 to the Minister of Contracting of Gambia made by Bordeaux Builders, Inc., a French corporation, and originating from its corporate headquarters in New York in order to secure a construction contract, 2. A birthday card and bottle of Californian wine sent annually by Woody Pulp, the chief executive officer of Pacific Paper Products, Inc., a U. S. corporation, to his long-standing friend who is the Director of Government Procurement for the Japanese government.

3. A cash payment of $100 made by an agent of Chicago Chemicals Co., a U. S. corporation, to a processing clerk in the Chilean Office of Business Licensing in order to expedite consideration of CCC’s application for authority to conduct business operations in Chile, 4. A cash payment of $250,000 made by Durdy Coal, Inc., a U. S. corporation, to DCI’s agent with the instruction, “put this to good use on DCI’s behalf,” which in turn is paid to the State Importation Officer of the People’s Republic of China in order to secure a Chinese import license BUS 430 Week 4 Individual Assignment GATT and WTO Paper

BUS 430 Week 5 Course Description BUS 430 Week 5 Individual Assignment Natural Gas Case Study BUS 430 Week 5 Learning Team Assignment Riordan Manufacturing Analysis