Your Fact Pattern

You are a brand manager for Priv Revaux, one of the sunglasses owned by the Italian sunglass company Safilo Group S.p.A. In fact, you have been instrumental in the creation of the Jamie Foxx Collection. Don't believe me? Look it up

As head of the brand, your primary focus is expanding sales in EMEA (Europe, Middle East and Africa).

Europe and Africa are covered and exceeding revenue targets but you lag in the Middle East. The primary market in the Middle East is Israel and you want to get your trendy glasses in the trendy sunglass shops in Tel Aviv. The only problem is that your local subsidiary Safilo Jordan S.A. is a Jordanian company based in Aqaba. Trying to get sales in Israel, you agreed to sell to Crazy Like a Foxx, ULC a well known Israeli distributor. With a contract in hand, you agree to ship $500,000 in inventory from Aqaba to Tel Aviv. The only problem is that the product proved so succesful that it sold out overnight and now Crazy Like a Foxx, ULC is sitting on a pile of money and refusing to pay.

Your sales contract included a provision that in the event of a dispute, the parties would agree to mediation before an arbitrator from the International Chamber of Commerce. The proceedings would be in English with the hearing to be held in Paris France.

Your Assignment

Crazy Like a Foxx, ULC has essentially dared you to sue them. What do you do in this situation? In evaluating your answer, please consider the following circumstances:

1. Would you issue a demand for arbitration for a hearing in Paris? Assuming both parties participate and you prevail, what are the odds of collecting your judgment?

2. Would you file a lawsuit in a Jordanian court? What are the odds of success if Crazy Like a Foxx, ULC has no presence in Jordan? Any benefits and/or pitfalls to consider?

3. Would you file a lawsuit in an Israeli court? What are the odds of success if Safilo Jordan S.A. has no presence in Israel. While Jordan and Israel have a peace treaty in effect, neither of them truly get along.

4. What, if any, other options are available to pursue collection (other than negotiate in good faith with Crazy Like a Fox, ULC)?

5. If Jordan did not issue any reservations to the New York Convention, would your answer to any of the items above change?

6. Assuming both parties adopted the New York Convention (without reservations) and the parties participated in binding arbitration, do you see a situation where an arbitration award would still not be accepted?

7. From a policy perspective, do you think the New York Convention (again, without reservations) would be a potential positive, negative or non-factor in economic activity between Jordan and Israel?

How to Respond

The easiest way to address these seven points is to treat them with discrete questions with their own title/headings (organization counts). I do not want a history or political science lesson but rather your justification and legal reasoning behind your answer. Points will be deducted if you use this as an opportunity to stand on a soap box and make me read a political lecture. The focus here is on legal issues - please keep it that way.