案例分析题【国际商法】

一．Is there any contract between X and Y?

•On April 4, Company X, with its place of business in China, sent an offer by e-mail to Company Y, with its place of business in Australia. The offer concerned 50,000 meters hand-printed cotton cloth and said it would remain open until April 30. On April 10, Company Y answered by e-mail : “The price is too high, and we are not interested in the offer.” But on April 20, the manager of Company Y changed his mind and sent another e-mail to accept the April 4 offer.

•Question: Is there any contract between company X and Company Y?

•Answer and Analysis

•No. Since both China and Australia are Contracting States to the CISG, according to Article 1 would apply here. After receiving the offer of 50,000 meters hand-printed cotton cloth, on April 10, Company Y stated that they were not interested in the offer, which rejected the offer. On April 20, the e-mail sent to accept the April 4 offer should be regarded as a new offer instead of acceptance. Therefore, there was no contract between Company X and Company Y.

二．WORLD-WIDE VOLKSEAGEN V.WOODSON •United States Supreme Court,1980

•FACTS: The Robinsons bought a new Audi from Seaway Volkswagen in New York state. While traveling through the State of Oklahoma, the Audi was rearended, causing a fire which severely burned Mrs. Robinson and her two

children.

•The Robinsons sued in tort侵权行为in Oklahoma versus retailer Seaway and wholesaler World-Wide Volkswagen, both New York corporations that did no business in Oklahonma. Both defendants entered special appearances to contest the trial court’s assertion of personal jurisdiction over them; Woodson was the trial judge.

•ISSUE: Does the State of Oklahoma have personal jurisdiction over an auto retailer and wholesaler who so not sell cars in the state?

•HOLDING: NO.

•LAW :Under the U.S. Constitution, Fourteenth Amendment’s Due Process Clause, there must be minimum contacts among the defendants, the forum, and the claim being made by plaintiffs in order for the state court to exercise personal jurisdiction属人管辖权

•EXPLANATION:Petitioners carried on no activities in Oklahoma , performed no sales or services there, and did not solicit business there through advertising or agents. The “foreseeability”of their cars being driven in Oklahoma is not enough to hale them into court there.

•ORDER: Case against the retailer and distributor is dismissed.

三．

•FACTS：A US foreign trade zone(FTZ) subzone was set up at Nissan Motor’s plant in Smyrna, Tennessee. Nissan then imported production machinery into the zone to assemble parts that were manufactured in Japan for sale in cars in the