Featured Quizzes
User Quizzes
Create Quiz
Data and Charts
Badges and Games
About JetPunk
Message Board
Dark Mode
Statistics for International Commercial Law - International Law and Global Commerce
Click here to take the quiz!
General Stats
- This quiz has been taken 6 times
- The average score is 7 of 10
Answer Stats
| Question | Answer | % Correct |
|---|---|---|
| A foreign technology company restructures its operations, moving its headquarters to a country that has a Bilateral Investment Treaty (BIT) with its target market. Six months later, the target market introduces a new data privacy law that negatively affects the company’s profits. The company files a claim under the BIT. What will the tribunal most likely examine? | Whether the company moved its headquarters solely to benefit from the BIT protections. | 100%
|
| Which of the following best describes the main principle of the Calvo Doctrine? | Foreign investors must rely on the local legal system of the host state for resolving disputes and cannot seek international intervention or diplomatic protection. | 80%
|
| An international cosmetics brand sues a country under a BIT for implementing new environmental regulations that ban certain ingredients in its products. The country argues that the regulation is in the public interest. Under what circumstances would the country’s defense be valid? | If the regulation is applied equally to all companies and not arbitrarily. | 80%
|
| A company headquartered in a European country enters into a joint venture with a local firm in Asia. After a change in government, the local firm is nationalized without compensation. The foreign company files for arbitration under a BIT between the two countries. What is the most likely argument the company will use? | That the nationalization constitutes an expropriation without compensation, violating the BIT. | 80%
|
| An energy company is accused of complicity in labor rights violations in a foreign country where it operates. Local workers sue the company in a U.S. court under a statute allowing foreign citizens to bring claims for international law violations. The court must decide whether it has subject-matter jurisdiction. What factor is most important? | Whether the alleged violations occurred in connection with U.S. business operations. | 80%
|
| A foreign investor owns a large manufacturing plant in a country that recently passed a law requiring significant reductions in carbon emissions. The investor argues that this new law violates their investment rights under a bilateral investment treaty (BIT). The government defends the law as necessary for protecting the environment. If this dispute is brought before an international investment tribunal, what is the tribunal’s primary focus likely to be? | Whether the law is a legitimate, reasonable, and non-discriminatory exercise of the state’s regulatory power. | 80%
|
| A foreign investor’s property is damaged during civil unrest in Host Country X. The local laws of Country X provide no compensation for such damage. The investor claims that Host Country X has violated its obligations under international law. If the investor is arguing based on the “Minimum Standard of Treatment” in international investment law, what is the most likely basis of the claim? | Host Country X must compensate the investor because international law requires a baseline standard of protection for foreign nationals and their property, regardless of local laws. | 60%
|
| A foreign investor from Country A owns a mining operation in Country B. Due to political unrest, Country B’s government seizes the mining operation without offering immediate compensation. Later, the government proposes to compensate the investor in local currency over the course of 20 years, but the total compensation is well below the market value of the mine. The investor brings a claim under a Bilateral Investment Treaty (BIT) between Country A and Country B. If the investor wanted to make a Hull Principle-type argument, what would be their most likely claim? | The compensation offered by Country B violates the Hull Principle because it is neither prompt nor adequate. | 60%
|
| A global pharmaceutical company initiates investor-state arbitration after a host country revokes its patent rights. The country argues that the revocation was necessary to protect public health and ensure access to affordable medicine. What principle must the tribunal balance in deciding the case? | The country’s right to regulate in the public interest versus the investor’s right to intellectual property protection. | 60%
|
| Foreign nationals file a lawsuit in a U.S. court against a multinational mining corporation, seeking damages for environmental harm caused by a spill at a mining site located outside the U.S. The court dismisses the case, stating that the damages occurred entirely abroad and lack a sufficient connection to the U.S. for the case to proceed. What legal doctrine did the court likely apply? | The presumption against extraterritoriality. | 40%
|
No matching quizzes found
Score Distribution
Percentile by Number Answered
Percent of People with Each Score
New and Popular
Save Your Progress