Legal Directions Various Involved Parties Could Have Adopted - Assignment Example

Student’s name Course code+name Professor’s name University name Legal directions various involved parties could have adopted Establishing facts of this matter with regard to various jurisdictions, case laws and bodies; first, United Nations Convection on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods (CISG) as well as Fair Work Act 2009 will form basis for the understanding on how to give legal directions to the parties involved. Secondly, it also needs to be established that questions regarding international contract and dispute resolution mechanisms are pertinent that Australian businesses ask in regard to international sales contracts. Working with the above framework, the first direction that Super-Cola Taiwan and Dag-Brucken should be given is that a contractual undertakings between businesses in Australia and foreign countries may be governed by provisions of CISG and in so saying, CISG provides that in case there are any inconsistence (as it is in this case) then it is the Convention which prevails. This is also the case where there are other disputes with other laws. That is, CISG will prevail over the law in Australia as well as Taiwan. Secondly, Article 25 of CISG provides that in the event of a breach of a contract from either Super-Cola Taiwan or Dag-Brucken and such becomes detrimental to either party (in this case Super-Cola Taiwan) and when such breach is not foreseeable, then Dag-Brucken is likely to lose the case. In this particular case, Super-Cola Taiwan was not informed that there were some arbitrary PC performance specifications that had no contractual obligation to design and develop the software as a clear example of unforeseeable risks. Under both bilateral and unilateral contracts, both parties must undertake to do or refrain from doing things that are likely to fail or will not perform up to the expected task. In this case, Dag-Brucken as a party failed to honour both bilateral and unilateral contracts by offering a system that was yet to be completely designed, other than in a broad conceptual terms but still allowed Super Cola Taiwan or Dag-Brucken to enter into the contract. Secondly, it was in breach of the contract for Dag-Brucken to assume that since the plant was in Taiwan and some of the staff allied to the Super-Cola Taiwan could speak and read Mandarian then the GUI labels should be Mandarian. The contract actually did not cover this issue and therefore the legal directions that Super-Cola Taiwan and Dag-Brucken ought to have adopted are the underpinnings of bilateral and unilateral contract provisions. The last parties in this case are the additional programmers employed by Dag-Brucken. It is clear from Fair Work Act 2009 that Australian worker is supposed to be engaged at work for up to 38 hours a week and paid the standard wage and any hour(s) above what is stipulated by Fair Work Act 2009 should be considered as overtime. Therefore having worked in Singapore and were rewarded ‘handsomely’ is not a springboard to ask for more remunerations than even full time employees because there terms of services is underpinned by Fair Work Act 2009 not Singaporean legal framework(s). Ethical and legal actions on the two external contractors On both ethical and legal framework, there are set rules that govern how international business should be conducted. Super-Cola Taiwan and Dag-Brucken are two external contractors who have breached aspects of legal and ethical provisions. Beginning with the latter, DB management knew that the product sold was not up to the task. Besides, the system was not completely designed except for its broad conceptual terms yet DB allowed Super-Cola Taiwan to enter in contracts that had guaranteed over 80% of the total price. Dag-Brucken is in itself is ethically unjustified. As argued by Farhoomand and Lovelock (2001), deontological and consequentialist vary in their principal of operation. For instance, deontological theories expect that Dag-Brucken should not lie regardless of the consequence of the truth. That is, the Company ought to have stressed on the duty and absolute rules. Therefore the action to be taken regarding such unethical action from Dag-Brucken is compensation depending on the losses incurred. Clarke and Nees (2000) explains that with regard to substantive law, some jurisdictions question the wisdom of law and in so doing, take actions to parties depending on the ethics of the case. On the other hand, Kant brings a different perspective on what should be considered ethical and unethical. He takes extreme (an absolute) position with ethical rules, arguing that it is always wrong to lie (Rasch, 1996). This is the part that was not honoured by Dag-Brucken. One of such lie is when DB priced the product exorbitantly considering the fact that if compared to other ASRS the product offered to Super-Cola Taiwan was not even competitive as DB tried to make it sound. The action that might be taken regarding such unethical practice is that the contract might be termed unfair and eventually nullified. The main reason that might trigger this is the fact that Dag-Brucken seemed to have more bargaining power in the transaction compared with Super-Cola Taiwan. A good example where a contract was termed unfair and eventually nullified regards Victorian case of Director of Consumer Affairs Victoria v Craig Langley Pty Ltd & Matrix Pilates and Yoga Pty Ltd. Looking at the possible actions from legal perspectives, both the external contractors have breached sections of United Nations Convection on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods as well as Australian Consumer Law (ACL). One issue which is apparent within the contract is that it was not standard form contract since Super-Cola Taiwan was not informed through the content of the contract, the specific characteristics of the commodity or the particular transactions engaged.1 The most likely action, as considered is other jurisdictions, is the rejection of the contract. In such events, termination of rejection of the contract by the law will consider the provisions of Article 29(2) of United Nations Convection on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods. Other legal aspects that might attract some actions in this case are the statement of the rule and certainty and completeness. Beginning with statement of the rule, from the expressions in this case, it is clear that both parties did not express themselves that their meanings could be determined with some degree of certainty. Unless this is done, the contract can eventually be terminated. But the stage at which it is, Super-Cola Taiwan may be compensated. This is conceptualized by the aspect of vagueness (concepts of uncertainty). The vagueness of the contract means that it is unlikely to be a valid offer in legal terms therefore not legally binding. Broad legal issues contained in within this case study The preamble of this issue is ascertaining whether there was a contract between the two contractors. Since this is a contractual relationship between businesses located in Australia and overseas, United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods helps in determining what a contract is. Therefore on legal grounds, article 11of CISG establishes that a contract is not complete and may not be termed one in case it is not concluded or evidenced by writing. Therefore from this provision is clear that DB err. Another clear legal issue in the case falls under Section ii article 35 of the CISG. This article requires that goods or materials contracted must conform to the claims of the second party. In this case, the second party is Super Cola Taiwan. With regard to automated storage and retrieval system facility supplied, the aftermath or the eventual collapse of the item shows that DB did not comply with this article by first, failing to supply the right quality and secondly packaged or shipped an item that was not described in the contract. The third issue that is legally binding DB is the failure to specify price. CISG requires that a contract be regarded as valid if the parties involved agree on price and that no silent price. There are issues that show no specific agreement on price stipulations was agreed between the two contractors. For instance, changing of language from Mandarin to English was hard since the contract did not specify who was responsible for the additional costs involved in rectifying the contract oversight of the issue. This shows that the contract is not complete and would not be upheld by the court. Similar situation regards case that involved Carlill v Carbollic Smoke Ball Company where the court nullified the contract in what was believed to be ‘mere puffery’ and not price as claimed by Carbollic Smoke Ball Company. Legal steps by SCT to avoid project failure The first legal step is for SCT to engage its lawyers in ascertaining some issues. One of the issues that resulted to the collapse of the project was that the software components required substantive modifications, tuning and debugging. Therefore it is clear that there was concept of vagueness. The vagueness could only be ascertained by legal teams with regard to provisions of CISG. One of the issues that the engaged lawyers would have ascertained is that whether the obligations of the parties on acceptance are unclear, and whether or not it is unlikely to be a valid offer in legal terms. Another step to be taken is the concept of facets to the principal. This contract actually contains a number of facets to the principle. First, the contract has a language that is so obscure and so incapable of any precise or definite meaning. To this regard, SCT ought to have sought legal redress so as to help it enter into the contract. Seeking legal redress in this case relates to understanding what jurisdictions within Taiwan explain regarding such problem. References Clarke, R., & Nees, S. (2000). Technological Protections for Digital Copyright Objects. Paper presented at the European Conference on Information Systems, Vienna. Farhoomand, A., & Lovelock, P. (2001). Global E-Commerce: Text and Cases. Singapore: Prentice Hall. Rasch, M. D. (1996). Criminal Law and the Internet. In J. F. Ruh Jr (Ed.), The Internet and Business: A Lawyers Guide to the Emerging Legal Issues: Computer Law Association. Read More