Within the international trade disagreements are often common. When to companies from different countries decide to do business it is in their best interest to make sure they are protected legally in their best interest while making sure it's enforceable.
UOP set up a hypothetical company dealing with international problem. The US Company is called CadMax Pharma and is based in Tampa Florida. They partner up with a company called Gentura which is located in a small developing country. CadMax and Gentura run into a problem within their business operations. These two companies have a contract which states CadMex will license their technology. Gentura is responsible to give CadMax the global marketing rights for an anti-diabetic drug that Gentura has developed.
I did an analysis of selecting the proper forum and venue for the dispute resolution. There were two choices of law; one is Candorean regulations for technology imports contracts (CRTIC).
The second is a contract for international sale (CISA). The advantages of CTRIC over CISA are that CTRIC is enforceable law as if it was in local law. CGIS does not always provide protection for intellectual property when doing a transaction with international business.
International arbitration would be in CadMex best interest when choosing a forum selection over Candorean courts or US courts. The reason for this would be because there is such thing called Foreign Sovereign Immunity act and Gentura may qualify for it, which mean that the US would not have any jurisdiction over Gentura. The US does not want to take the risk that Gentura's government has the power of intervening in at any time when using Candorean courts. It is in both companies best interest if they use International arbitration because it's formal, faster private and most important less expensive then litigation.
Gentura has issued...