Share this on:
 E-mail
9
VIEWS
0
COMMENTS
 
SHARES
About this iReport
  • Not vetted for CNN

  • Click to view unclaimed's profile
    Posted September 15, 2012 by
    unclaimed

    More from unclaimed

    BILLY C/JIM, People Should Not Park Their Cars and Unload Groceries Right Next to Satish's Mercedes

     

    Dear Legal Buff/Business Aficionado/Music and Sports Fan: International law is interesting because it often involves litigation and/or lawsuits which are filed when two countries are at war with each other, and perhaps a neutral third party is offended or injured in the process.  The case of the  Argentine Republic v. Amerada Hess Shipping Corporation  was the perfect example of this kind of application of international laws within the context of a wartime scenario.  More specifically, the Republic of Argentina and Great Britain (with then prime minister Margaret Thatcher at the "helm") were at war over possession of the Falkland Islands (to the British) or the "Islas Malvinas" (to the Argentines).  While Argentina and Great Britain were at war with each other, however, a third party was injured in international waters approximately 600 nautical miles from Argentina and 500 miles from the Falkland Islands (and therefore not in a territory designated as a "war zone").  The name of the ship was the "hercules" and apparently it was either owned by the United States or by the country of Liberia, even though the Americans also had ownership interests in the Liberian-owned ships.  Apparently, the "Hercules" traveled back and forth from the oil pipeline in Alaska (Valdez) to the Hess refinery in the U.S. Virgin Islands.  Basically the United States Supreme Court held (with Chief Justice Rehnquist delivering the majority opinion) that the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act of 1976 (FSIA) does not authorize jurisdiction over a foreign state in this situation (FSIA codified at 28 U.S.C.A. Section 1330).  Here goes a page on the  Argentine Republic v. Amerada Hess Shipping Corp. , supra: http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=3159047986208155221&hl=en&as_sdt=2&as_vis=1&oi=scholarr    The respondents were the American company named United Carriers and the Liberian corporation named Amerada Hess, and they sought relief in the federal courts at the Southern District of New York (once again, this is the jurisdiction where Justice Barrington Parker presides over cases).  United Carriers sought $10 million in damages for the loss of the ship while Amerada Hess sought $1.9 million in damages for the loss of fuel carried by the ship.  They invoked the District Court's jurisdiction under the Alien Tort Statute codified at 28 U.S.C.A. Section 1350 and Amerada Hess brought suit under admiralty an

    • TAGS:

    What do you think of this story?

    Select one of the options below. Your feedback will help tell CNN producers what to do with this iReport. If you'd like, you can explain your choice in the comments below.
    Be and editor! Choose an option below:
      Awesome! Put this on TV! Almost! Needs work. This submission violates iReport's community guidelines.

    Comments

    Log in to comment

    iReport welcomes a lively discussion, so comments on iReports are not pre-screened before they post. See the iReport community guidelines for details about content that is not welcome on iReport.

    Add your Story Add your Story