Month: April 2017

  • Case of the Day: United States ex rel. Bunk v. Gosselin Worldwide Moving

    The case of the day is United States ex rel. Bunk v. Gosselin Worldwide Moving, N.V. (E.D. Va. 2016). Kurt Bunk and Ray Ammons sued Gosselin Worldwide Moving, N.V. under the False Claims Act, alleging that Gosselin had acted wrongfully (the opinion doesn’t say exactly how) in connection with its participation in two military shipping……

  • Non-expert Thoughts On The Syria Attack

    The consensus view on the legality of the American attack on Syria among experts seems clear: the attacks, most experts have said, was illegal under international law. The basic reason is this. Article 2(4) of the United Nations Charter provides: “All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force……

  • Advising on Choice of Law and Choice of Forum

    My firm, Murphy & King, has put together short videos featuring some of our lawyers. My video, which has been given a somewhat highfalutin but also nondescriptive title, is about the wisdom of agreeing on choice of law and choice of forum—something many small- and mid-sized companies—and sometimes big companies!—fail to do when contracting. Check……

  • Hague Securities Convention: The Explanatory Report

    As I noted a few months ago, the Hague Securities Convention has now come into force. The Hague Conference has now published a second edition of the explanatory report that accompanies the Convention.

  • Case of the Day: Philipp v. Germany

    The case of the day is Philipp v. Federal Republic of Germany (D.D.C. 2017). It involves the Guelph Treasure, the Welfenschatz. In 1929, a consortium of three Jewish art dealers, J&S Goldschmidt, I. Rosenbaum, and Z.M. Hackenbroch, purchased the Treasure from the Duke of Brunswick-Lüneberg. The Treasure included dozens of medieval reliquaries and other religious……