“

 

[۱۵] Fellmeth A.2005.Challenge and consquences of a systemic social effect theory. U.ILL.L.Rev. Nov. Part IV.

 

[۱۶] Alfred D.1990. Scale and scope: The dynamics of industrial Capitalism. Lexington books. P 38.

 

[۱۷] Ramirez v, Jeffrey P .1985.The strange new world of united state export controls under the international emergency economic powers act,18 vand.j.Transnet, L71.describing president use of emergency powers to revive the EAR.

 

[۱۸] Sigma Aldrich.2002. dept of commerce bureau indus. Available from: http://www. Bis.doc.gov.Enforcement/ casesummaries/ sigma Aldrich.ALJ.html.

 

[۱۹] U.S.2005.Scommitments on international regulation of Arns and related goods and technologies include the wassenear arrangement on export controls for conventional Arms and dual use goods and technologies.Avilable from: http:// www. Australia Group. Net.html..

 

[۲۰] U.S.2005.Scommitments on international regulation of Arns and related goods and technologies include the wassenear arrangement on export controls for conventional Arms and dual use goods and technologies.Avilable from: http:// www.mtcr.info.html.[Accessed .۱۸٫Dec.2005].

 

[۲۱] U.S.2005.Scommitments on international regulation of Arns and related goods and technologies include the wassenear arrangement on export controls for conventional Arms and dual use goods and technologies.Avilable from: http:// www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/fy2004/tables.html

 

[۲۲] U.S.2005.Scommitments on international regulation of Arns and related goods and technologies include the wassenear arrangement on export controls for conventional Arms and dual use goods and technologies.Avilable from:http://www.nuciear suppliers group.org [Accessed.dec.2005]

 

Abstract

 

The application of ” successor liability” theories is relatively new to international trade law and has exploded since the turn of the century.successor liability is an equitable state law doctrine that allows a company of criditors to seek damages from a different company that either acquired the assets of or merged with the debtor company.

 

In the have be attended several public confrences in the Washington beltway area in which various high-ranking government officials in the BIS, OFAC, DDTC, and CBT have announced “off the record” that asset purchasers will henceforth be held liable for any past violation of the export or import regulations by the asset seller. Giwen the ubiquity of corporate reorganizations and asset purchases, every company that imports or exports goods, services, software or technology is affected by these new practices. This project briefly discusses the historical development of and general policies underlying international traderegulation and summarizes the law of successer liability and explains how federal courts have applied it in enforcement actions brought pursuant to federal statutes. So describes attempts by the international trade law enforcement agencies to import successor laibility into their respective regulatory regimes. In the next part considers whether the addation of successor laibility concepts to international trade regulation can be justified under the statuts administered by the enforcement agencies. Then turns to the question of how agency practices reflect judicial notions of the appropriate role of syccessor liability in the enforcement of federal stetutes.finally considers whether successor liability is reasonably compatible with international trad regulation from the various standpoints of doctrine , public policy , and constitutional law. The results indicate that, first successor laibility is not clearly authorized by the relevant statutes, and in any case is a poor doctrinal fit with international trade law; cecond, successor laibility fails to advance any recognizable public policy when applied in international trade law and indeed operates to the detriment of some important public policy ; and, third, the integration of successor liability into international trad regulation violates the fifth amendment guarantee of due process of law. Successor liability is,in short, a cure for a non-existent disease, and like nearly all cures, it has undesiable side effects. Finally, the project generalizes the lessons derived from this study to advance our understanding of the larger problem of administrative agency power and discretion.

 

Kay words : international trade; successor laibility; federal law; asset purchasers.

 

 

 

 

 

Islamic Azad University

 

Damghan Branch

 

Faculty of law

 

A Thesis Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirments For

 

the Degree of M.sc in international trade law

 

Title

 

The Doctorine of Seccessor Liability in International Trade Law

 

In case study of U.S.A

 

Supervisor

 

Dr.Ahmad Asgari

 

Advisor

 

Dr. Ali Amiri Porghassab

 

By

 

Parviz eslami

 

September 2015

 

      1. برای مثال، Hoard v. Chesapeake و Ohio را ببینید. ، ۱۲۳ U.S. 222 (1887)؛ Graham v. R.R. Co، ۱۰۲ U.S. 148 (1880) ↑

 

    1. البته دادگاه کمی هم اغراق می‌کند. نتیجه ی محتمل یک قانون گذاری مخل، در بخش VI.B، infra نمایش داده شده است. ↑

 

      1. ایالات متحده Betfoods، ۵۲۴ U.S. 51، ۶۱ (۱۹۹۸)؛ بر اساس شرکت Potlatch 201 Cal . (Cal. Ct.. App. 1984) (نهادی که یک شرکت را می خرد، “هیچ اموالی از آن را به دست نمی آورد، و تنها چیزی که به دست می آورد سهام آن است…البته این امری بنیادی است که یک سهام دار هیچ بخش خاصی از اموال شرکت را صاحب نمی شود.”)؛ مجموعه یادداشت های SFA، Inc، Bannon، ۵۸۵ A. 2d 666، ۶۷۳ (Conn. 1991) (گیومه ی داخل آن حذف شده است.) (“این امری بنیادی ‌در مورد قانون شرکت است که شرکت والد و توابع آن به عنوان اشخاص حقوقی جداگانه در نظر گرفته می‌شوند حتی اگر شرکت مادر صاحب تمامی سهام توبع خود باشد و هر دو تشکیل اقتصادی مدیران و کارمندان یکسان خود را داشته باشند ↑

 

    1. بسته به ساختار ادغام، نهاد استنتاج شده، ممکن است نهاد حاصل منتچ یا در حال استنتاج باشد. تصمیم ساختار معمولا ‌بر اساس ملزومات مالیات و مسئولیت می‌باشد ↑

 

“

موضوعات: بدون موضوع  لینک ثابت


فرم در حال بارگذاری ...