Posted: June 6th, 2019

HI5015 Legal Aspects of International Trade & Enterprise Assessment

HOLMES INSTITUTE
FACULTY OF
HIGHER EDUCATION
HI5015 Legal Aspects of International Trade & Enterprise
Assessment Details and Submission Guidelines
Trimester T1 2019
Unit Code HI5015
Unit Title Legal Aspects of International Trade & Enterprise
Assessment Type Group Assignment
Assessment Title Research paper and presentation
Purpose of the
assessment (with ULO
Mapping)
Students are required to research an International Law Case of your choice from the
list below and explain in a report format on the background of the dispute, facts, legal
issues, individual parties’ arguments, tribunal’s decision and the importance of the
case in international law.
Weight 30% of the total assessments
Total Marks 20 marks – research paper and 10 marks for presentation
Word limit Not more than 2000 words
Due Date Friday Week 10 – 11.59pm
Submission
Guidelines
 All work must be submitted on Blackboard by the due date along with a completed
Assignment Cover Page.
 The assignment must be in MS Word format, no spacing, 12-pt Arial font and 2 cm
margins on all four sides of your page with appropriate section headings and page
numbers.
 Reference sources must be cited in the text of the report, and listed appropriately
at the end in a reference list using Harvard referencing style.
Page 2 of 8
HI5015 Legal Aspects of International Trade & Enterprise
Assignment 2 Specifications
Purpose:
This assignment aims at ensuring that students have familiarised themselves with their chosen
International Case law and are able to explain the background of the dispute, facts, legal issues,
individual parties’ arguments, tribunal’s decision and the importance of the case in international
law.
Details:
Topics and presentation schedule:
Please organise yourselves into groups of not more than 5 students and not less than 3 students.
The assignment consists of 2 parts;
A. Written report – worth 20% and must be submitted – Friday Week 10 at 11.59pm.
1. Select a case from the list of International Law Cases below.
2. Advise your lecturer by email of your group members with student ID numbers and chosen case.
Please note: your lecturer’s prior approval of your case is required.
3. Select the party you wish to represent (ex. China in the “Philippines v. China in the South China sea”
case; or Canada in “Canada v. Australia – Measures Affecting Importation of Salmon”).
4. Research, read and understand your selected case.
5. Prepare and submit a written report discussing the following:
 background of the dispute
 brief facts of the case
 the legal issues presented
 the individual parties’ arguments, with particular emphasis on your selected party’s
arguments
 the tribunal’s decision
 the importance or significance of the case in international law (i.e. why the case is important
in the development of international law). You can also discuss any other developments
following the court or tribunal’s decision.
Assignment structure is to be written as a report format. It must include;
 Cover page
 Executive summary
 Table of contents
 Section headings
 Paragraphing
 Page numbers
 Reference list at the end of the report
Page 3 of 8
HI5015 Legal Aspects of International Trade & Enterprise
B. Group Presentation – worth 10% and will be presented / submitted in week 10.
Strict adherence to the 10 minute limit is expected.
1. Present and discuss the summary of your report in 10 minutes.
2. The Presentation will be done in class or video recording. Your lecturer will advise which is more
appropriate. Whether in-class or video presentation, all members must present. The group will be
marked down if not all members present.
3. Video link must be uploaded to a publicly-viewable video sharing platform (ex. Youtube, Dropbox,
Google drive) and the video link uploaded on Blackboard.
4. A video presentation consists of both images and audio. For this reason, a plain Power Point
presentation showing slides even with accompanying voice recording is not considered a video and,
hence, not allowed.
Important Reminders:
Lecturer approval of chosen case:
1. You must email your lecturer your list of group members and chosen case by week 4.
2. You must obtain approval by email from your lecturer of your group and chosen case before starting
work on it. You must NOT start work on your group assignment until your lecturer approves your
group and case. Please note: failure to obtain lecturer approval will result in a failing mark for the
entire group for this assignment.
Submission:
1. All group report submissions must be done online and run through SafeAssign. No hard copies are to
be submitted. Only one group member needs to submit for the whole group.
2. Please fill in the “Group Report cover sheet” (available in Blackboard under “Assignments and Due
dates) and attach as a cover sheet to your group report and upload on Blackboard.
3. Each group must email to their lecturer a “Peer Evaluation of Individual Participation in Group
Assignment” sheet (available in Blackboard under “Assignments and Due dates).
4. Non-submission of either the group report or video presentation link (if a group is doing a video) on
Blackboard/SafeAssign (if doing a video presentation) is equivalent to non-submission, which will
merit a mark of 0 (zero) for the group assignment.
5. This is a group assignment and is meant to be worked on in groups. Groups of less than 3 and more 5
members will receive a penalty of 10 marks (50%).
6. Reports must be submitted via SafeAssign on Blackboard and show a similarity percentage figure.
Any group report that does not show a SafeAssign similarity percentage will not be marked and be
required to re-submit.
7. Late submissions will be subject to Holmes Institute policy on student assessment submission and
late penalties (please refer to subject outline and Student handbook).
Page 4 of 8
HI5015 Legal Aspects of International Trade & Enterprise
Citation and referencing:
1. The group report must have a minimum of 6 scholarly, academic references, which are appropriate
for a Masters Level assignment.
2. Assignments are expected to observe proper referencing in accordance with a generally accepted
system of citation (ex, Harvard System). A properly referenced assignment showing in-text citation is
critical to passing and obtaining a good mark in the group assignment.
SafeAssign similarity percentage:
1. Plagiarism in any form, shape or manner is unacceptable under any circumstances and will be dealt
with according to Institute policy on plagiarism.
2. In general, for written reports, a SafeAssign similarity percentage of 25% or below is acceptable.
Regardless of the similarity figure, all group reports must use in-text citation and observe proper
referencing rules.
INTERNATIONAL LAW CASES
Please choose from one of the following topics from the list (see below).
Note:
Where possible, groups are expected to refer to the texts of the original cases and conduct additional
research. Do not rely merely on the case summaries as it is not possible to write a 2,000 word report based
only on case summaries.
1. De Sanchez v. Banco Central De Nicaragua Textbook (August, Mayer & Bixby 6th ed): pp. 63-65
2. Chattin v. United Mexican States Textbook: pp. 93-96 3.
3. Islamic Republic or Iran v. United Sates of America https://monkessays.com/write-my-essay/icj-cij.org/en/case/79
4. Commission of the European Communities v. Federal Republic of Germany Textbook: pp. 51-53 .
5. Sandline International Inc. v. Papua New Guinea Textbook: pp. 73-76
6. The M/V Saiga Case (Merits) Textbook: pp. 98-103
7. In the matter of the Loewen Group Inc. and Raymond L Loewen vs USA Textbook: pp. 145-147
8. Bumper Development Corp. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis and Others Textbook:
pp. 150-153
9. Abbott v. Republic of South Africa Textbook: pp. 163-167
10. Bank of India v. Gobindram Naraindas Sadhwani and Others Textbook: pp. 172-175
11. Jorge Luis Machuca Gonzalez et al. v. Chrysler Corporation et al. Textbook: pp. 177-179
12. Barcelona Traction, Light and Power Co. (Belgium v. Spain) Textbook: pp. 187-189 https://monkessays.com/write-my-essay/icjcij.org/en/case/50
13. Metro Industries v. Sammi Corp. Textbook: pp. 200-205
14. United States v. Blondek, Tull, Castle, and Lowry Textbook: pp. 225-229
15. Arab Republic of Egypt v. Southern Pacific Properties, Ltd., et al. Textbook: pp. 249-250
16. Brady v. Brown Textbook: pp. 257-262
17. Nissan Motor Mfg. Corp., U.S.A. v. United States Textbook: pp.264-266
18. The Bhopal Case – Charan Lal Sahu v. Union of India Textbook: pp. 277-281
19. Batchelder v. Kawamoto Textbook: pp. 288-290
20. Wilson, Smithett & Cope, Ltd v. Terruzzi Textbook: pp. 315-319
21. Hunt et al. v. Alliance North American Government Income Trust, Inc. et al. Textbook: pp. 344-345
22. Vishipco Line et al. v. Chase Manhattan Bank, N.A. Textbook: pp. 351-354
23. Finance Ministry v. Manifattura Lane Marz Otto, SpA Textbook: pp. 378-379
24. Canada v. Australia – Measures Affecting Importation of Salmon
https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dispu_e/cases_e/ds18_e.htm
Page 5 of 8
HI5015 Legal Aspects of International Trade & Enterprise
25. Japan—Taxes on Alcoholic Beverages Textbook: pp. 381-384
26. Duberg v. UNESCO Textbook: pp. 452-454
27. State v. Nagami (Japan 1968) Textbook: pp. 470-472 6
28. Spiess et al. v. C. Itoh & Co. (America), Inc. (US 1979) Textbook: pp. 480-482
29. Performing Right Society Limited v. Hickey Textbook: pp. 494-496
30. Amar Nath Sehgal v. Union of India Textbook: pp. 499-501
31. Starbucks and Ethiopia Dispute Coffee Trademark Issues Textbook: pp. 513-515
https://monkessays.com/write-my-essay/wipo.int/ipadvantage/en/details.jsp?id=2621 https://www.ictsd.org/bridgesnews/biores/news/ethiopia-and-starbucks-reachcoffee-agreement
32. Experience Hendrix, L.L.C. v. Hammerton Textbook: pp. 516-521
33. Treibacher Industrie, A.G. v. Allegheny Technologies, Inc. Textbook: pp. 576-579
34. Chicago Prime Packers, Inc. v. Northern Food Trading Co. (US 2005) Textbook: pp. 595-598
35. M. Golodetz & co. v. Czarnikow-Rionda Co., Inc. (The Galitia) Textbook: pp. 62-632
36. Great China Metal Industries Co. Ltd. v. Malaysian International Shipping Corp. Textbook: pp. 635-
639
37. Mair v. Bank of Nova Scotia (Eastern Caribbean States 1983) Textbook: pp. 671-673
38. Far East Realty Investment, Inc. v. Court of Appeals et al. (Philippines 1988) Textbook: pp. 676-677
39. Trans Trust Sprl v. Danubian Trading Co., Ltd. (UK 1952) Textbook: pp. 687-689
40. Sztejn v. J. Henry Schoeder Banking Corp. Textbook: pp. 695-696
41. Philippines v. China in the South China Sea https://pca-cpa.org/wpcontent/uploads/sites/175/2016/07/PH-CN-20160712- Award.pdf
https://monkessays.com/write-my-essay/straitstimes.com/asia/philippines-vs-china-in-the-south-china-sea-thedispute-so-far
42. In the arbitration proceeding between Fraport AG Frankfurt Airport Services Worldwide (Claimant)
and Republic of the Philippines: International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes,
Washington, D.C.)
https://www.italaw.com/sites/default/files/case-documents/italaw4114.pdf
Marking criteria
Marking criteria Weighting
Written Report
Introduction to chosen case 4%
Identification of legal issues 6%
Tribunal’s decision 6%
Organisation or structure 2%
Referencing 2%
TOTAL 20%
Presentation
Discussion on the content of the topic 3%
Overall presentation clarity 3%
Overall impression 4%
TOTAL 10%
TOTAL Weight 30%
Assessment Feedback to the Student:
Page 6 of 8
HI5015 Legal Aspects of International Trade & Enterprise
Marking Rubric – Written Report
Excellent Very Good Good Satisfactory Unsatisfactory
Introduction of
case, background
and facts of the
case
(4 marks)
Demonstration of
thorough
knowledge of the
chosen case
(4 marks)
Demonstration
of a very good
knowledge of
the chosen case
(3.5 marks)
Demonstration
of a good
knowledge of
the chosen case
(2.5 marks)
Demonstration
of satisfactory
knowledge of
the chosen case
(2 marks)
Demonstration
of little or no
knowledge of
the chosen
case and
discussion has
little or no
relevance to
the case
chosen.
(1 mark)
Identification of
legal issues
presented and
individual parties’
arguments, with
particular
emphasis on
selected party’s
arguments.
(6 marks)
Accurately and
succinctly
identified all of
the issues and
sub-issues
confronting the
parties so as to
resolve the
problem.
(6 marks)
Identification of
all of the issues
and sub-issues
confronting the
parties so as to
resolve the
problem.
(5.5 marks)
Identification of
most but not all
of the issues
and sub-issues
confronting the
parties so as to
resolve the
problem.
(4.5 marks)
Identification of
some of the
issues and subissues
confronting the
parties so as to
resolve the
problem.
(3.5 marks)
Failure to
identify any of
the issues and
sub-issues
confronting the
parties so as to
resolve the
problem.
(<2 marks)
Explanation of
the tribunal’s
decision and
significance of
the case in
international law
(6 marks)
Accurately and
succinctly
explained all of
the tribunal’s
decision and the
significance of the
case in
international law.
(6 marks)
Explained all of
the tribunal’s
decision and the
significance of
the case in
international
law.
(5.5 marks)
Explained most
but not all of
the tribunal’s
decision and the
significance of
the case in
international
law.
(4.5 marks)
Explained some
of the tribunal’s
decision and the
significance of
the case in
international
law.
(3.5 marks)
Failure to
explain any of
the tribunal’s
decision and
the significance
of the case in
international
law.
(<2 marks)
Overall
presentation and
quality of report
(2 marks)
Report is
exceptionally
structured with
clarity, use of
paragraphs and
subheadings.
(2 marks)
Report is well
structured with
clarity, use of
paragraphs and
subheadings.
(1.75 marks)
Report is
somewhat
structured with
clarity, use of
paragraphs and
subheadings.
(1.5 marks))
Report is
structured with
some clarity,
and use of some
paragraphs and
subheadings.
(1 mark)
Poorly
presented.
Report is not
structured with
any clarity, and
does not use of
paragraphs and
subheadings.
(0.5 mark)
Referencing
(2 marks)
Clear systematic
referencing using
Harvard style for
Clear systematic
referencing
using Harvard
Clear systematic
referencing
using Harvard
Limited attempt
at formatting
references.
Poorly
presented, no
apparent
Page 7 of 8
HI5015 Legal Aspects of International Trade & Enterprise
all sources. At
least 6 relevant
references were
used from good
sources.
All in-text
referencing done
correctly and
relevant.
(2 marks)
style for all
sources. At
least 5 relevant
references were
used from good
sources.
All in-text
referencing
done correctly
and relevant.
(1.75marks)
style for all
sources. At
least 4 relevant
references were
used from good
sources.
Most in-text
referencing
done correctly
and relevant.
(1.5 marks)
References
largely
unrelated to the
topic area.
At least 3
references were
provided. Most
in-text
referencing
done correctly
and relevant.
(1 mark)
structure. No
use of Harvard
referencing
style.
References
were unrelated
to the topic
area. Only 0 r 1
relevant
reference given
(0.5 mark)
Marking Rubric – Presentation
Excellent Very Good Good Satisfactory Unsatisfactory
Discussion on the
content of the topic
(3 marks)
Excellent
discussion from
all speakers.
Discussion was
relevant and
insightful at all
times.
(3 marks)
Very Good
discussion
from all
speakers.
Discussion was
relevant and
insightful most
of the time
(2.5 marks)
Very Good
discussion from
most speakers.
Discussion was
relevant and
insightful some
of the time
(2 marks)
Satisfactory
discussion from
all speakers.
Discussion was
relevant and
provided no
insight
(1.5 marks)
Little or no
discussion
from speakers.
Discussion not
relevant to the
topic being
discussed.
(1 mark)
Overall presentation
clarity
(3 marks)
Excellent use of
visual aids.
Presentation
structured well
to ensure that all
topics were
covered equally.
(3 marks)
Very good use
of visual aids.
Presentation
structured well
to ensure that
all topics were
covered
equally.
(2.5 marks)
Good use of
visual aids.
Presentation
structured well
to ensure that
all topics were
mostly covered
equally.
(2 marks)
Satisfactory use
of visual aids.
Presentation
structured
whereby most
topics were
covered
(1.5 marks)
No visual aids
used.
Presentation
had no
structure and
most topics
were not
covered.
(1 mark)
Overall impression
(4 marks)
Outstanding
impression left
on audience.
Each speaker had
a thorough
knowledge of the
areas discussed
and contributed
equally.
Exceptionally
professional
delivery and
audience
engagement.
Adherence to the
time constraints
Very good
impression left
on audience.
Each speaker
had a
somewhat
thorough
knowledge of
the areas
discussed and
contributed
somewhat
equally. Very
professional
delivery and
audience
Good
impression left
on audience.
Each speaker
had a
somewhat
thorough
knowledge of
the areas
discussed and
contributed
somewhat
equally.
Professional
delivery and
audience
Satisfactory
impression left
on audience.
Most speakers
had some
knowledge of
the areas
discussed and
contributed
somewhat
equally.
Somewhat
professional
delivery and
audience
engagement.
No impression
left on
audience.
Most speakers
had little
knowledge of
the areas
discussed and
did not
contribute
equally. No
professional
delivery or
audience
engagement.
No adherence
Page 8 of 8
HI5015 Legal Aspects of International Trade & Enterprise
of 10 minutes
(4 marks)
engagement.
Adherence to
the time
constraints of
10 minutes
(3.5 marks)
engagement.
Adherence to
the time
constraints of
10 minutes
(3 marks)
Adherence to
the time
constraints of
10 minutes
(2 marks)
to the time
constraints of
10 minutes
(1 mark)