World Trade Organization (WTO) is playing a key role in regional trade relations. It was vital due to its significance in world trade and its external trade relations, and continues playing a key role in the world business (World Trade Organization, p. 258). Access to unilateral or bilateral or multilateral dispute settlement is helping it to examine and anchor the more complex regional disciplines. In fact, WTO rules and regulations act like a magnifying glass of countries’ trade policies. In this area, goodwill and reputation, high-value asset to draw attention business and negotiate trade contract, is thus stake. The dispute between Argentina and Chile regarding wheat safeguard case is in such point. Chile lost the case of wheat safeguards with Argentina and WTO played a major role in it. The WTO decision on this case concludes that by maintaining a border measure similar to a variable import levy and to a minimum import price, Chile is acting in a manner inconsistent with Article 4.1 of the Agreement on Agriculture. “In the panel Report, circulated to Members of the WTO on 3 May 2002, the Panel found that Chile’s price band system is inconsistent with Article 4.2 of the Agreement on Agreeculture and Article II:1(b) of the GATT 1994. the Panel also found that Chile’s safeguard measures on wheat, wheat flour and edible oils violated certain provisions of the Agreement on Safeguards and the GATT 1994” (World Trade Organization, p. 3047). Argentina’s argument was that Chile’s price band system was either a ‘variable import levy’, a ‘minimum import price’ or a ‘similar border measure other than ordinary custom duties (Trebilcock and Howse, p. 340).

Best Essay Writing Services

Need Custom Written Paper? We'll Write an essay from scratch according to your instructions

Plagiarism Free

Prices From Only $11.99/Page

Call now Order now Start chat

For this reason it has failed to apply the recommendations and rules & regulations of the Dispute Settlement Body. Such case is considered very importantly by WTO to solve the problem in better way. McMahon states that

“On 25 September 2003, Chile published in the Official Journal Law No. 19.897 establishing rules on the importation of goods into the country, amending Article 12 of Law No. 18.525 and the Customs Tariff, and on 4 October 2003 Chile published in the Official Journal Supreme Decree No. 831 of the Ministry of Finance regulating the application of Article 12 of Law 18.525, as substituted by Article 1 of Law 19.897.6 This Decree regulates certain aspects of the PBS, the modifications of which entered into force on 16 December 2003 for the products at issue in this dispute, with the exception of edible vegetable oils, which ceased to be subject to the PBS as of the date of publication of Law No. 19.897” (p. 43).

Initiation steps taken by Chilean Government

On 11 April 2008, the Asociación de Molineros del Centro A.G. submitted application for the initiation for an investigation into claimed dumping and the application of impermanent anti-dumping measures on import of wheat flour from Argentina. After a week later, the national commission decided to initiate an examination into possible dumping of imports of wheat from Argentina. On 3 July 2008, the Minister of Finance of Chile decided to impose a provisional anti-dumping duty of 30.3% on imports of wheat flour from Argentina. Finally, on 2 January 2009, the Minister of Finance confirmed the anti-dumping duty of 30.3% on imports of wheat flour from Argentina under tariff heading 1101.0000 of the customs tariff.

You can ask us “write my legal brief” on this or any other topic at Essay-Online-Shop.com. Don’t waste your time, order now!

Responses by Argentine Government

On all these accounts, there are some problems with the rules which do not support the action taken by Chilean Government. According to Argentina, the investigation done by Chilean authorities, the determinations made and the extra duties imposed is inconsistent with Chile’s responsibilities under the provisions of GATT 1994 and the anti-dumping agreement. In addition, Argentina regards the anti-dumping measures on importing wheat flour from Argentina violates the Articles 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 9, 12, 13 and 18 of the Anti-Dumping Agreement and Annex II thereto and Article VI of the GATT 1994.

According to Argentina, the price band system is not limited with the measures, but also with the rules and recommendation of WTO. There have been however more disputes going on between the two sides regarding the mixed oil price and safety measures. After all, these disputes did not affect the overall Articles and their implementation.

The following WTO rules were allegedly broken and what the panel founds is given below:-

• By maintaining a continuous border measure parallel to a variable import levy and to the minimum import price, Chile has acted in a manner which violates with Article 4.2 of the agreement on Agriculture and thus failed to apply the implement the rules and recommendations of the Dispute Settlement Body.
• It was unnecessary, for the resolution of the dispute, to make separate findings under Articles II: 1(b) of GATT 1994 and XVI:4 of the WTO Agreement (Report Of The Appellate Body).

Implementation status of adopted reports

On 11 November 2002, at the DSB meeting, Chile declared that it intended to act in accordance with the recommendations and rules & regulations of the DSB. To that point, Chile engaged in the consultations with the other actor Argentina to find a mutual satisfactory solution of that dispute in a persuasive way. In addition to this, Chile stated that it would need additional and reasonable time to bring its measure into conformity with the rules & regulations and recommendations of the DSB. On 6 December 2002, it also informed DSB that Chile and Argentina has been failed to reach into the mutual agreement. Besides this, they have been also failed to agree on the length of the required period of time. Therefore, Argentina and Chile agreed on the issue of postponing the deadline of binding arbitration which could be completed no longer than ninety days. They informed this to the DSB and stated about the extension of time to implement those recommendations and rulings of DSB.

On 17 March 2003, the judge concluded that the extension of reasonable period of time should be extended to Chile. The reasonable period of time can be extended so that Chile can implement the recommendations and rulings of the DSB.

On 23 January 2004, at the meeting of DSB, both Chile and Argentina stated about the bilateral agreement regarding the process under articles 21.5 and 22 of the DSU. In this related field, Chile also stated that the issue of sequencing between 21.5 and 22 can not be implemented until further agreement. In this case Argentina noted the issue of consultations regarding the implementation of recommendations and rulings of DSB.

On 19 may 2004, however, Argentina recommended consultations with other actor Chile under the rules and regulations of Article 21.5 of the DSU. In addition to this, it requested to hold up the establishment of the former panel under the Article 21.5 of the DSU. Finally, at the meeting held on 20 January 2006, Dispute Settlement Body (DSB) agreed to refer the matter raised by Argentina to the former original panel if possible (Report of the Appellate Body).

Implications for firms and industries

The dispute has given several implications for the various firms and industries involved and these are as follows:-

• In case of internal institutional setting, the absence of comprehensible and pre-established tools to handle dispute is detrimental to all parties. While private industries risks subjective dismissal of the case, the public sectors provide an uncertain and unavoidable decisions. The considerable time, cost and expertise required to run the dispute for the firms and industries of developing countries is certainly a problem. However, by reallocating public officials to make a stable and multidisciplinary corps of specialists to handle trade disputes can be considered as a cost-effective solution. By this way, past experience and learning can be implemented to reconcile the two sides.
• In terms of business involvement, the key element for the firms and industries was their participation in the sense of responsibility with the public agencies. It gives a great lesson of understanding the importance of accurate information, statistical data and financial cooperation.
• From the perspective of capacity building, the case is to be said as a shared learning understanding among all parties. It encourages building up a strong confidence of public agents for the purpose of other products.
• The bargaining strategy taken by governments and their temporal de-linking issues provide the basic experience of calculating the maximum and minimum losses of all firms and industries.
• It gives a clear idea of how the process can be lengthened to reallocate all the information from all the parties involved in the case.

In the case under consideration, Rene was driving a vehicle which accelerated without warning. As a result, she was injured as the vehicle collided with a guardrail by the roadside. This gives an impression that the driver was not anticipating for the acceleration because her efforts to gain control of the vehicle were not successful. In fact, her inability to control the car shows that she did everything she could to mitigate damage.

Issue

The proponents of product liability imply that Speedo Motors Corporation, the vehicle’s manufacturer, will be liable for Rene’s injuries. This is because a manufacturer ought to be held accountable for the injuries resulting from the use or application of their products. In fact, one can be held liable for product liability in the event of producing a product that becomes detrimental for the wellbeing of the consumer. A product is said to be defective when it has more drawbacks than the anticipated benefits. Defective product is the leading cause of injuries that occur after it has been sold from the market place. A claim for a defective product can be recovered when the plaintiff proves the existence of a contractual relationship termed as ‘privity of contract’. However, the requirement varies from one state to another.

Best Essay Writing Services

Need Custom Written Paper? We'll Write an essay from scratch according to your instructions

Plagiarism Free

Prices From Only $11.99/Page

Call now Order now Start chat

Rule

The defectiveness of a product can be classified into three broad categories – marketing defects, design defects, and manufacturing defects. From Rene’s case, it is apparent that the product was defective in manufacture because it experienced a sudden acceleration. In the event of the defect not having anything to do with manufacturing, Speedo brand ought to have given a warning on the same. Similarly, the fact that no warning was given implies that the manufacturer did not anticipate for the same. This confirms the fact that the damage pertains to manufacturing defects.

Analysis

A defective design arises when the product does not conform to the expectations of a customer. Manufacturing defects, on the other hand, is when the manufacturing process incorporates some shoddy workmanship. Marketing defects pertain to negligence in the ways in which a product is marketed. Such a defect incorporates improper labelling as well as inadequate warnings. In most predicaments, marketing defects depend on the foreseeable dangers that come from a product. Therefore, the uncontrolled design must have been a result of defective manufacture.

The plaintiff can recover compensation from the manufacturer of a defective product by relying on the maxim of strict liability. Under strict liability, a person can recover compensation without necessarily showing that the manufacturer was negligent. However, the manufacturer cannot be held liable for a defect in manufacture if the product was innately unsafe and the consumer knew that it was unsafe. In a product liability case, two rules can be helpful to the plaintiff. The first is a rule known as the doctrine of ‘res ipsa loquitur’. It shifts the burden of proof to the defendant. The other rule is a strict liability where the plaintiff will only show that the product was defective.

You can ask us “write my case brief” on this or any other topic at Essay-Online-Shop.com. Don’t waste your time, order now!

Conclusion

It is the prerogative of the manufacturer to provide a warning to the user on how to use the product during a foreseeable danger. Therefore, any damage that the manufacturer could not foresee implies that negligence was involved. This means that Speedo Motors Corporation will be held accountable for the plaintiff’s injuries. Rene will, therefore, recover compensation for damages resulting from the unexpected acceleration. However, she will have to prove that the defendant was the manufacturer of the product and the product had a defect. She also has to prove that her injuries were caused the defective product.

The observed and evaluated cases are equally problematic from the due process of law. While the State of Utah v. Travis Dee Timmermann estimates the power of the Sixth Amendment, the Wesley Henson v. Allen Reddin explores the conversion attribution to the property that equally belongs to the parties. The research of the cases shows the necessity of the flexible approach for the sake of the efficient cases judgement and analysis. Though the decision on the cases is stated in the numerous law sources, the closer analysis of the court rationale is required.

State of Utah v. Travis Dee Timmermann,

Introduction

The first case, the State of Utah v. Travis Dee Timmermann, provides a domestic violence and the attempted rape. According to the case material, the attentive neighbor called the police after hearing the cries in the Timmermann house. The officer McLelland attended the house and examined bruises on Mrs. Timmermann’s face and arms. According to Mrs. Timmermann’s testimony, her husband repeatedly hit her and tried to force her to the sexual intercourse. The nurse’s analysis proved Mrs. Timmermann’s words that created a pretext for the lawsuit. However, Mr. Timmermann tried to take an advantage of the Sixth Amendment that implied the right not to testify against a wife/husband at the trial (Schubert, 2000, p. 174).

The cases are similar from the judgement viewpoint as their interpretation could alter the final decision on them.

Best Essay Writing Services

Need Custom Written Paper? We'll Write an essay from scratch according to your instructions

Plagiarism Free

Prices From Only $11.99/Page

Call now Order now Start chat

The Analysis of the Solutions

The decision of the State of Utah v. Travis Dee Timmermann was just owing to the exclusiveness of the testimony. Mrs. Timmermann cried for help that resulted in the police call. She had apparent signs of fight and battery on her body. In addition, her testimony was “well-organized and recorded” according to the State of Utah’s court decision (Schubert, 2000, p. 174). This fact made her account fully valid for being used in court and be provided as the primary evidence against her husband.

Mr. Timmermann, in his turn, evidently planned to escape the justice. He observed Mrs. Timmermann’s refusal from the trial testimony as an advantage and appealed for the bindover quash. Similarly to the second case, he attacked the evidence and questioned its validity and truthfulness. However, his misinterpretation of the spousal testimony charges resulted in being guilty as charged. Mr. Timmermann intended to show his wife’s testimony being insufficient for the trial. To some extent, he appealed to the existing rule in the Sixth Amendment that prevented husband and wife from the testimony against each other. Mrs. Timmermann’s evidence, however, is still functional as she provided them in the due form, in the presence of the police force and the medical examiner (Schubert, 2000, p. 174). Accordingly, her testimony is sufficient for the trial without the necessity of repeating it before the court. As a result, the act of providing the evidence cannot be influenced by the final court’s decision or the negation of charges.

Accordingly, the court decided justly to overrule the quash owing to the inability of the spousal testimonial provilage application. As ruled in 502 (a) Utah Code section 78B-1-137, Mrs. Timmermann’s testimony was sufficient for pressing charges, and she was already free from testifying in court. It is qualified under the 8 U.S. Code § 1641 – Definitions (battery) (Legal Information Institute).

Wesley Henson v. Allen Reddin,

Introduction

The second case, Wesley Henson v. Allen Reddin, consisted of the fraud and conversion. Mr. Henson agreed to sell his share/or the machine to Mr. Reddin. The machine was non-functional that resulted in Mr. Reddin’s purchase of the needful tools for its repair. Mr. Reddin purchased the property at a price of $4,561.52. Accordingly, Mr. Reddin was a full property owner as he owns the machine. Mr. Henson removed the trailer and thus, damaged the property. Mr. Reddin filed a lawsuit to return the property on the pretext of the ownership rights. The act of the property concealment apparently was classified as conversion (Schubert, 2000, p. 410).

The Analysis of the Solution

In the case of Wesley Henson v. Allen Reddin, the court faced several obstacles. First, the court was to decide on Mr. Reddin’s contribution to the machine’s repairing; second, to estimate the damage caused to Mr. Reddin by Mr. Henson’s conversion; third, to qualify the actions of Mr. Henson as either a fraud or a conversion. The court’s decision not only defines the responsibility of Mr. Henson but also negates his unlawful actions of keeping the property from the full rights owner.

The court justfly decided for three reasons. First, the plaintiff provided a proof of the machine’s purchase that enabled him performing a control over it and usage in personal interest. Second, the plaintiff repaired the machine at his own cost estimated $857.94 additional charges. Third, the defendant disabled the plaintiff from the ability to use the machine for the personal purposes that qualify his actions under the 11 U.S. Code § 706 – Conversion (Legal Information Institute).

The court took into consideration every detail of the examination and justly overruled Mr. Henson’s issues. This affirmed the judgement on the triple obligation to Mr. Reddin. Therefore, the defendant ought to return the property to Mr. Reddin’s possessions. Moreover, Mr. Henson is to pay the damages for the property harm to Mr. Reddin. Furthremore, Mr. Henson is obliged to pay 5% interest rate to Mr. Reddin from December 16, 2010 (the purchase day) until paid in full.

The primary difficulty of the case, unlike the State of Utah v. Travis Dee Timmermann, was qualifying Mr. Henson’s actions and evaluating the damage. However, the court did not question any of the outlined points. In addition, the court did not qualify Mr. Henson’s actions as the fraud that prevented Mr. Henson from the additional charges beyond the repair and the interest rate expenditures.

Conclusion

The above discussed cases are multi-layered and uneasy to solve. On the one hand, they contain the intentions of the defendant to turn the evidence in their favor. On the other hand, they reveal the inability of cheating the justice system.

Thus, Mr. Timmermann appealed to the spousal testimony privilege to annul the wife’s charges of battery and attempted rape. At the same time, the documented accusations were still used in court without the necessity of the spousal testimony. The court qualified the testimony as a due process and charged Mr. Timmermann despite Mrs. Timmermann’s court silence. Moreover, it insisted on the voluntary evidence’s provision by Mrs. Timmermann that does not violate either the Sixth Amendment or the spousal testimony privilege of the defendant.

You can ask us “write my case brief” on this or any other topic at Essay-Online-Shop.com. Don’t waste your time, order now!

Similarly, Mr. Henson intended to preserve the property lawfully purchased by Mr. Reddin. He used the details of Mr. Reddin and decided to maintain the machine without the prior notification or dispute with Mr. Reddin that resulted in the lawsuit. The court naturally abandoned the allegations as the Mr. Henson converted the property that was no more in his possession and obliged to pay him the interest rate for Mr. Reddin’s lost profits as a result of the machine out of order state.

To conclude, the cases are highly informative and illustrating for the US legislature decision-making. The priority of law and the Constitution compliance are the best potential methods of the efficient case accomplishment.

Washington vs. Glucksberg

(Petitioner) Washington State and the Legal Representative v. Respondents Harold Gluksberg, M.D., Abigail Halperin, M.D., Thomas A. Preston, M.D., and Peter Shalit, M.D., medical doctors who work in the State of Washington. 521 U.S. 702 (1997).

Procedural History:

In January 1994, the respondents mentioned above and plaintiffs, who have already passed away, as well as a non-organization that counsels individuals inclined to physician-assisted suicide sued in the U.S district court seeking a declaration on Wash Rev. Code 9A.36.060 (1) (1994) as unconstitutional. Apparently, the Neighborhood Court concluded that Washington-supported suicide prohibition is unauthorized as it places an unwarranted restriction on the practice of constitutionally protected independence awareness (Glucksberg, 1998). As a result, the Ninth Track regarded the issue en banc and confirmed the District Court’s decision. Fundamentally, it was decided that the state’s death-assisted prohibition was illegal.

Best Essay Writing Services

Need Custom Written Paper? We'll Write an essay from scratch according to your instructions

Plagiarism Free

Prices From Only $11.99/Page

Call now Order now Start chat

Facts:

It is a crime to help individuals take part in a suicide-related issue in the state of Washington as per the Constitution. The dispute at hand is that the petitioners assume that they should be allowed to practice the contents of physician-assisted suicide, and the ban on their practice is unconstitutional. They take for granted that the independent choice guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment, in this case, consists of individual verdicts by a sensitively able, fatally sick adult to undergo a physician-assisted death. It is interesting that the court concurred with the plaintiff’s perspective (Carmichael, 2010). The court indicated that the prohibition brings about an unwarranted challenge on the practice of the established and supported liberation of significance.

Issue:

The challenge talked about by the court is related to the parties concerned; in fact, the policy of supporting suicide is not innovative, but somewhat steady approach of the state’s pledge to protect and safeguard the human life. The court highlighted its point by illustrating how Anglo-American community conventionally has disciplined and opposed both forced death and assisted suicide perceptions in the state of Washington. In spite of the fact that Americans have put into consideration strategies in medicinal expertise and the increased significance of end-of-life decision-making, the rule still claims that it is unauthorized to take one’s life (Glucksberg, 1998). Significantly, the issue being discussed is apparently crucial for the Washington residents as it entails protecting their rights as human beings.

Ruling Reasoning:

The Court’s conclusion considered that the account of the law’s management of the supported death is a kind of the negative answer to virtually all ways to sanction it. The conclusion stated that the “right” to support assisted death is not a noteworthy liberation concern that is taken care of by the Due Process Clause. The court added to their decision that Washington’s ban on the assisted suicide should be associated with legitimate government needs. Apparently, Washington practices what incriminates several state interests. Some of the interests that were taken into consideration while concluding the case were defending family life and the loved ones, taking care of life, shielding the honor of the medical line of work, and restricting the outlook movement toward euthanasia (Carmichael, 2010). Fundamentally, the verdict of the ”en banc Court of Appeal” was overturned, and the case was held for further experience reliable with the vision: “It is ordered.”

Dissenting or Concurring Opinion

Dissent:

In this case, Justice Souter based on Justice Harlan’s opinion in Poe v. Ullman queried if Washington decree comes up with one of those random obligations concerning the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. It was concluded that the approach outlining the “liberty” area of expertise protected by the Fourteenth Amendment was, in fact, never put into effect. The suggestion was based on the view that it supports the biased elements in the due procedure of legal evaluation (Glucksberg, 1998).

Concurrence:

Justice O’Connor actually agreed that there is a lack of a comprehensive right to commit suicide; hence, there is no reason to address the issue of a mentally competent person undergoing pain making the decision to die. Justice Stevens also concurred that the Washington law that prohibits assisted suicide is on the right track; thus, it is appropriate to practice its contents. Justice Ginsburg agreed with the decision made by the court by supporting the responses made by Justice O’Connor’s point of view. Justice Breyer agreed with the ruling on the perspective that Justice O’Connor is right because the process of undergoing an assisted suicide consists of physical suffering (Carmichael, 2010). The court describes the issue as a “right to obligate forced death with another’s support”, but Breyer enumerates that he would not refuse the respondent’s assertion in the non-attendance of a dissimilar approach that the officially permitted custom would produce a better support.

You can ask us “write my case brief” on this or any other topic at Essay-Online-Shop.com. Don’t waste your time, order now!

Additionally, he also concludes that the court might end up reconsidering its conclusions in similar cases in future to come up with decisions that are comprehensible to the citizens of Washington. Justice Souter also agreed with the ruling comparing it to the standard law contents. Souter also adds up that the legal appraisal, as opposed to the official legislative, is a court’s dealing. The assumptions made by Souter imply that if a person sues against the Washington Statute, then he/she can be perceived to have a constitutional right to do that (Glucksberg, 1998). The implication here is that the judges agree with the perception that it is unconstitutional in Washington to practice the contents of assisted suicide.