Browse the archives

Browse the articles in this issue.

• ARBITRATION
  Eleventh Circuit affirms district court’s refusal to confirm English arbitration award for lack of subject matter jurisdiction under Federal Arbitration Act because plaintiff failed to prove existence of prior written arbitration agreement
• CHILD ABDUCTION
  As matter of first impression in First Circuit, Court holds that abducting parent can be convicted under federal International Parental Kidnapping Crime Act (IPKCA) for conduct that is not considered criminal under state family law
• INDIGENOUS PEOPLES
  Supreme Court of Denmark rejects claim by Thule Tribe that 1951 U.S.-Danish agreement for U.S. Airbase in Thule, Greenland that limited its hunting grounds and led to relocation of Tribe contravened the Danish constitution
• PUBLIC HEALTH
  EU Court of First Instance holds that prominent Canadian researcher who discovered low efficacy and serious side effects of drug to treat thalassamia major during three clinical trials required by U. S. Food and Drug Administration and reported adverse data to EU agencies about to approve drug, has insufficient public health interest to annul EC Commission’s decision to approve drug since her reports had led EU agencies to reconsider and qualify drug approval and since any injury to her reputation was not available ground for annulment
• SOVEREIGN IMMUNITY
  In tort case against Iran by former Hizbollah hostage, D.C. Circuit holds that neither Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act nor Flatow Amendment thereto creates private right of action against foreign government as such but only against its individual officials, employees, or agents for terrorist acts done in course of their government employment
• TRADEMARKS
  Responding to reference from Austrian court, ECJ interprets pertinent EC law as not preventing Member State court from domestically enforcing its pre-accession trademark agreement with non-member state where domestic marketing by Austrian company of Anheuser-Busch’s import “American Bud” may cause confusion with non-member state’s marks protected in Member State by such agreement
• WORLD TRADE ORGANIZATION
  In dispute between Canada and United States on its imposition of countervailing duties on imported Canadian softwood lumber, WTO Appellate Body concludes that U.S. Department of Commerce (DOC)’s failure to conduct pass-through analysis as to upstream lumber transactions did not comport with either SCM Agreement or GATT 1994; whereas neither DOC’s finding that provincial stumpage programs amounted to financial contribution nor its determination of amount of benefits involved clashed with SCM Agreement