*Make #1 and #2 into separate word documents* #1.- READ the Ethical Considerations feature found in the textbook at p. 84, the excerpt of In Re Union Carbide Gas Plant Disaster at Bhopal in the textbook at pp. 13-14, and the portions of Chapter 3 in the textbook that relate to litigation and conflicts of law in international commercial disputes (pp. 62-77). RESPOND to the follow questions: Should Union Carbide have chosen a resolution of the litigation more fair and equitable to the Bhopal community without regard to the consequences to the company? Why or why not? Explain your response. The initial response should be no less than 250 words in length. #2.- READ the case excerpt of Fallhowe v. Hilton Worldwide, Inc. in the textbook at pp. 71-72. Also, be sure to read the portions of Chapter 3 in the textbook that relate to litigation and conflicts of law in international disputes (pp. 62-77) as some of the concepts discussed there will help inform your response. RESPOND to the follow questions: 1. What were the court’s reasons for applying forum non conveniens to this case and requiring refiling of the litigation in Mexico? 2. Does the court’s opinion reward Hilton at the expense of the Fallhowes by requiring them to file their lawsuit in Mexico when both the plaintiffs and defendants are based in the United States? 3. Would the outcome of the case change if the political situation in Mexico become unstable? Should it change under such circumstances? Why or why not? Be thorough but concise. You can write a single, extended response or break down each question separately — I am interested in content not form. Your response should be no more than 350 words in length. While there is no minimum length requirement, I expect you to make a direct response to each question and also include a concise explanation of your resobnse.
Place this order or similar order and get an amazing discount. USE Discount code “GET20” for 20% discount