Republic of Argentina et al. v. Weltover, Inc. et al. – Case Review
Republic of Argentina et al. v. Weltover, Inc. et al. – Case Review
Introduction
The present paper discusses the case of the Republic of Argentina et al. v. Weltover Inc. et al. The case at hand concerns a dispute over the jurisdictional admissibility of a claim originally brought by the respondents in the present case. The document would present information over the theoretical terms and concepts used in the judgement. Afterwards, we would summarize the facts of the case, address the legal issue and present the argumentation of the parties and the conclusion of the Court.
Conceptual Framework
This part would provide the theoretical background needed for the proper understanding of the case, the applicable laws and the conclusions of the Court. It would also provide a brief procedural history.
Definitions
Jurisdiction – the authority of a court to give a ruling on a case i.e. verdict in a legal dispute between two parties.
Subject matter jurisdiction – the authority of a court to hear and decide on a certain case on the basis of specific subject or type
Personal jurisdiction – as well the authority of courts over the two parties to decide on certain case
Forum non conveniens or “inconvenient forum” – a municipal court declining to hear a dispute because it is more appropriate to be heard in a foreign court
Nominalism – The concept encompasses the principle that fluctuations in the purchasing power or in the foreign exchange rate of money does not affect the amount owed (i.e. the particular sum of money owed) under an obligation to pay. In other words, the amount is fixed and remains unchanged irrespective of the changes in the value of money.
Place of payment –This is the place of performance of the obligation of a debtor to pay under an international contract.
Direct effect – 1) an effect is “direct” if it comes as an “immediate consequence of the defendant’s … activity”
Bonds – an investment tool whereby an entity borrows money for a defined
Introduction
The present paper discusses the case of the Republic of Argentina et al. v. Weltover Inc. et al. The case at hand concerns a dispute over the jurisdictional admissibility of a claim originally brought by the respondents in the present case. The document would present information over the theoretical terms and concepts used in the judgement. Afterwards, we would summarize the facts of the case, address the legal issue and present the argumentation of the parties and the conclusion of the Court.
Conceptual Framework
This part would provide the theoretical background needed for the proper understanding of the case, the applicable laws and the conclusions of the Court. It would also provide a brief procedural history.
Definitions
Jurisdiction – the authority of a court to give a ruling on a case i.e. verdict in a legal dispute between two parties.
Subject matter jurisdiction – the authority of a court to hear and decide on a certain case on the basis of specific subject or type
Personal jurisdiction – as well the authority of courts over the two parties to decide on certain case
Forum non conveniens or “inconvenient forum” – a municipal court declining to hear a dispute because it is more appropriate to be heard in a foreign court
Nominalism – The concept encompasses the principle that fluctuations in the purchasing power or in the foreign exchange rate of money does not affect the amount owed (i.e. the particular sum of money owed) under an obligation to pay. In other words, the amount is fixed and remains unchanged irrespective of the changes in the value of money.
Place of payment –This is the place of performance of the obligation of a debtor to pay under an international contract.
Direct effect – 1) an effect is “direct” if it comes as an “immediate consequence of the defendant’s … activity”
Bonds – an investment tool whereby an entity borrows money for a defined
References: - Republic of Argentina ET AL v Weltover, Inc. Et Al - R. August, D. Mayer, M. Bixby, International Business Law (Fifth edition, Pearson education, 2008)