A Historical Analysis of International Law Through the Lens of the United States of America

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ankit Malhotra
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
International Law ◽  
United States Of America ◽  
Historical Analysis ◽  
The United States

Różne perspektywy dotyczące skutków art. 95 CISG

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Małgorzata Danuta Pohl-Michałek
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
United Nations ◽  
International Law ◽  
United States Of America ◽  
Democratic Republic ◽  
The United States ◽  
Private International Law ◽  
United Nations Convention ◽  
International Sale Of Goods ◽  
Conflict Of Law

The 1980 United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods (CISG) was adopted in order to provide uniform rules governing the international sale of goods. It has already been ratified by an impressive number of 92 Contracting States, with the major trading countries taking the lead. The CISG applies to contracts for the sale of goods between parties whose places of business are in different States, where the States are CISG Contracting States (Article 1(1)(a)). Moreover, it applies to contracts for the sale of goods when the contracting parties have their places of business in different States and when the rules of private international law lead to the application of the law of a CISG Contracting State (Article 1(1)(b)). However, at the time of ratification, the prospective Contracting States are given the possibility of making additional reservations, including one set out in Article 95 CISG, which limits the application of Article 1(1)(b) of the Convention. Although there are some CISG Contracting States that initially applied the reservation but have since withdrawn it, there are still a few Contracting States where the reservation remains[1], including the two largest trading countries – China and the United States. The paper presents various approaches regarding the interpretation of the effects of the reservation set out in Article 95 CISG, which in fact challenge the principle of the uniform interpretation and application of the Convention’s provisions. The author argues that the Article 95 CISG reservation leads to increased confusion and problematic conflict of law issues that bring more chaos than benefits.   [1] The remaining Article 95 CISG Reservatory States are: Armenia, China, the Lao People's Democratic Republic, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Singapore, Slovakia and the United States of America. Information is based on the official website: https://treaties.un.org/pages/ViewDetails.aspx?src=TREATY&mtdsg_no=X-10&chapter=10 (accessed: 9.12.2019).

A Comparative Historical Analysis of the Evolution of the Venture Capital Industry in the Economic Regions of the United States of America, Europe, and China

2020 ◽  
pp. 244-264
Author(s):  
Som Sekhar Bhattacharyya ◽  
Bibhash Laik ◽  
Divya Sharma ◽  
Tirthankar Bose
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Venture Capital ◽  
United States Of America ◽  
Business Models ◽  
Historical Analysis ◽  
The United States ◽  
China And India ◽  
Firm Investments ◽  
The Usa ◽  
Market Opportunities

Venture capital (VC) provides a platform to empowered individuals with financial constraints to transform their ideas into business models and attain commercial success. This article reviewed the growth and trends of VC industry across various regions such as the United States of America (USA), Europe, China, and India. Initially, VC firms flourished and developed in the USA and still it harbors the largest VC industry. From the USA, VC firms spread to Europe and then much later to emerging economies like China and India. Although the VC ecosystem had started late in China, it had registered higher growth when compared to Europe in terms of VC investment. China has become the second largest VC market. It was backed by government initiatives, vast market opportunities, and home-grown technology firm investments. India has started observing growth in VC space later than China but had ample opportunities to allow for a surge in VC activities.

scholarly journals Comparative Study of International Commercial Arbitration and International Law in Iran

2016 ◽  
Vol 9 (7) ◽  
pp. 242
Author(s):  
Soheila Hashemi ◽  
Nader Mardani
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
International Law ◽  
United States Of America ◽  
The United States ◽  
Islamic Republic ◽  
Commercial Arbitration ◽  
International Commercial Arbitration ◽  
Two Factors ◽  
International Trading ◽  
Islamic Republic Of Iran

Arbitration is one of the most important solutions to end enmity and replace judicial inquest. As international trading is extended, referring to judgment to solve the conflicts caused by commercial contracts has been rapidly rising which is a result of judgment benefits over justice authorities. Fastness and efficiency, law inquest cost, compromise nature of selecting the referees, and professional selection are among the most evident specifications of arbitration. Furthermore, Iran’s involvement in the most significant judgment case of the last century i.e. the lawsuits filed between the Islamic Republic of Iran the United States of America after the victory of the revolution would double the essentiality of knowing this organization. Judgment may be either individual or organic (permanent) and also the number of referees needs to be one or three. The most important issue in the judge’s inquest is to follow two factors including independence and impartiality from the beginning until the end of the inquest process. Violating these characteristics or the lack of one of both or other descriptions predicted in the arbitration contract would result in its violation by one side of the conflict or both of them. In the present paper, a comparison is conducted between the commonalty and distinction of Iran’s international commercial arbitration in 1376 and international law.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document