INTERNATIONAL LAW
W.B. Fisch, Fall 2001
Assignment #37
[Ch. 12. INTERNATIONAL CONFLICT OF LAWS]
D. The Act of State Doctrine
UNDERHILL V. HERNANDEZ, p. 807 (US 1897)
-
what act is the subject matter of the suit?
-
is it a uniquely governmental act?
-
does it matter that Hernandez was not acting for a recognized government
at the time?
-
what would have been the result, if Hernandez' revolution had failed?
BANCO NACIONAL DE CUBA V. SABBATINO, RECEIVER, p. 809 (U.S. 1964)
-
what was the underlying commercial transaction?
-
what was the specific subject matter of the lawsuit?
-
what was the theory of recovery in BoNac's action?
-
breach of contract? what contract?
-
conversion of the sugar, represented by the bills of lading?
-
what difference does it make?
-
what was the act of state involved?
-
what was the position of the State Department with respect to that act?
-
what is the rationale for the AoS doctrine?
-
a principle of international law?
-
a requirement of the U.S. constitution?
-
a "prudential" rule adopted by the Court to preserve its own credibility?
-
What was the Court's view of the state of international law on the issue
at hand?
The Sabbatino Amendment (text N. 3 p. 816)
-
what are the specific prerequisites for application of the prohibition
against applying AoS?
-
should the statute be regarded as an unconstitutional interference with
the judiciary?
W.S. KIRKPATRICK & CO. V. ENVIRONMENTAL TECTONICS CORP., INT'L, p.
817 (US 1990)
-
what does the plaintiff have to show under RICO in order to recover?
-
that a bribe was employed which was unlawful under Nigerian law?
-
that the awarding of the contract to the defendant was unlawful?
-
was the bribe an "act of state" within the meaning of the AoS doctrine?
-
what was the position of the State Department in this case?
-
were they arguing for an interpretation of AoS calling for a case-by-case
inquiry into whether there would be embarrassment to the executive branch
resulting from invalidation of the foreign act of state in question?