Comparative law analysis between Australian, Germany and China Legal Systems

Essay by ayamUniversity, Master'sA+, March 2009

download word file, 18 pages 0.0

Downloaded 29 times

Assignment 1 - Haris Mohamed Noorani (0050092042) LAW5504: Comparative Law & Business

Total word count = 3499 *

(*excluding TOC)

1.0 Introduction

Comparative law can be described as the systematic study of particular legal traditions and legal rules on a comparative basis.� In a comparative law exercise, there must be 'specific comparative reflections on the problem to which the work is devoted', and that this is best done by stating the essentials of each foreign law, as a basis for critical comparison, concluding the exercise with suggestions about the proper policy for the law to adopt, which may then require reinterpretation of one's own system.�

For this essay, Moe's legal position against (a) Burns and Co (hereafter referred to as B&CO), (b) Lisa and Bart personally; and (c) King Kong Constructions (hereafter referred to as KKCO) will be discussed, and each of the jurisdictions studied will be applied.

Therefore, we will apply the law of Australia, and two Civil Law jurisdictions (the law of Germany� and the law of China�).

For the second part of the essay, by applying the Australian choice of law rules, we will discuss which law would govern the given situation.

Given the facts of the situation are not completely detailed, and the impossibility to review all possible arguments from all angles within the limited words allowed, several assumptions will be made to determine the likely outcome of the issues raised.

As Australia has generally inherited the British Common Law,� there will also be case references from it.

2.0 Moe v B&CO


The first issue that arises from the given situation is whether B&CO as a company can be treated as a separate legal entity in each jurisdiction.

Under the Common Law, B&CO as a company is treated as a separate legal...