Analysis of Risk Avoidance Strategy for cases under consideration
Abstract
Worldwide Concepts, Inc. is a technology company that deals with Biotech instruments and drugs. Along with this, it also deals with offering consultation to various firms into similar industry. The main operating units of the Organization are spread worldwide, with its manufacturing facility in China, assembling facility in Mexico, biotech partners in Israel and software design partners in Russia and India.
The report deals with the prime concern of CEO of the company, which is about dealing with the legal pitfalls the Organization is currently facing. There are recommendations based on the international business law discussed in detail, which apparently works in favor of the companies dealing with international businesses.
The Problem 4
Risk Avoidance Plan 4
Recent Cases challenging Law and Ethics of the Organization 4
How can the Organization mitigate the challenges? 4
How can the Organization resolve such disputes? 5
Conclusion 7
References 8
The Problem
Worldwide Concepts Inc., an international technology company dealing with the Biotech instruments and drugs, along with the consultation to other firms in similar domain, is currently facing certain legal pitfalls due to its operation spread worldwide. Its manufacturing facility is based in China, assembling facility in Mexico, Biotech partners in Israel and software design partners in Russia and India.
The case study below delves into the aspects of international business law that can help the company avoid and resolve business disputes efficiently.
Risk Avoidance Plan
Recent Cases challenging Law and Ethics of the Organization
Many of the Bio-Tech products trading internationally have been contributing to the socio-economic factors as the ever-raised concern. However, in the recent years, the other ethical and social factors like cultural and religious differences have started alleviating the problem further. There are significant differences in regulatory approaches countries practicing on biotechnology.
How can the Organization mitigate the challenges?
There are laws favoring the working of the companies which trade internationally on specific commodities. The Food and Drug administration issued a procedural statement, in which it mentioned that biotech products were generally considered to be good like conventional food and as such, it don’t need prior market approval under few circumstances (Schaffer, Earle & Agusti, 1999). The regulation comprises control in labs, pollution and environmental, risk review, and socio-economic considerations for pre-marketing authorizations, beside subject to regulation are labeling, traceability and other monitoring measures for post-approval surveillance.
The Bio-safety Protocol is the fore-most international legally binding agreement on the trade of GMOs. It has come in to force from 2003. By the year 2010, about 159 countries and EU have joined and to the Protocol ((Schaffer, Earle & Agusti, 1999). The parties shall ensure the development, packing, logistics, use, transfer are undertaken as such that protects or reduces the problems in biological diversity in view of considering challenges to human health. It also contains important provisions of the precautionary principle, advance informed agreement (AIA), information sharing, a compliance mechanism, public involvement and capacity-development and financial matters in countries progressing, etc. Before the enactment of the protocol, there was no globally binding instrument to resolve the transfer and logistics and use of LMOs resulting from biotechnology ((Schaffer, Earle & Agusti, 1999).
The frequent instances of labor strike, higher wage demands, non-cooperation by the local authorities and the language related barriers are minor in nature, yet huge in number. For Worldwide Concepts Inc., it gets next to impossible to continue its operations in the foreign nations with the local authorities demanding written resolution for various lodged cases before proceeding further to action, causing the trade to suffer.
How can the Organization resolve such disputes?
International Court of Justice is the answer. It put into practice in 1945 and it began to work in 1946. The court will cover a most of legal activity and but as on date, the court take up only a few cases (Magnus, 2004). However, from 1980, many developing countries have been started approaching. There is an understanding informally for seat arrangement. There will be five seats for western countries, African countries will take 3 Nos., and two chosen by Eastern and European states and finally balance 3 seats for Asian states and two for Latin American and Caribbean states respectively. As stated in article 93 of the UN charter, all 193 UN members will be members to the Court automatically. Non-UN member become parties to the court’s statute. Once a country or state is a party to the Court’s statute, it can go for filing the before the Court. The issue of jurisdiction is considered with two types of cases – advisory opinions and contentious problems (Magnus, 2004).
Under contentious, Court gives a binding rule to both the parties and states for consent to submit to the ruling of the court. Individuals, Corporations and others parts including NGOs, UN organs and self-determination groups are excluded for filing cases, but, it is open to collect information from public and international organizations (Douglas, 1996). Only states may be parties in contentious cases. This does not preclude non-state interests from subject of rulings, if one country brings against another country. Advisory opinions another important work of the court and it is open only to specified UN bodies and agencies. On receiving a request, the Court will decide the states, which state and organizations would provide useful information and would give them an opportunity to submit either in written or in oral form (Douglas, 1996). However, some of the documents and specific policies can be produced before the advisory to make specifically binding on particular agencies or states and they are inherently non-binding under the Court. Some other international courts like ICC are not under the flagship of International court. As of now also, some of the international court like ICC have been working on its own.
Once decision was taken place, the Court issues a majority opinion. But, individual judges would issue separate opinions or non-confirming opinions. There will be no further appeal, however, any party can ask for the court to explain about any dispute as to the definition or purpose and limits of the court’s judgment (August, 2004).
Conclusion
Majority of cases of minor and major behavior relating to ‘Law and Ethics’ and ‘International Dispute Resolution’ can be handled with basic knowledge of legal reforms that have recently been implemented to favor the international trade.
References
August, R. (2004). International business law. Upper Saddle River, N.J.: Prentice Hall.
Douglas, K. (1996). Business law international. Melbourne: RMIT School of Business Studies. Dept. of Law and Economics.
Litka, M. (1991). Cases in international business law. Boston: PWS-Kent Pub.
Magnus, U. (2004). Global trade law. München: Sellier.
Schaffer, R., Earle, B., & Agusti, F. (1999). International business law and its environment. Cincinnati, Ohio: West Educational Pub. Co.
