Задания на самостоятельную работу

I. Прочитайте и переведите текст. Составьте краткий пересказ текста (3-4 предложения), используя выделенные слова

Read and translate the texts. Make up sentences using the italicized words

TEXT 1

Lawyers Ask N.Y. Federal Judge to Find Iran Liable for Sept. 11 Terror Attacks

Larry Neumeister All Articles

The Associated Press

May 24, 2011

Lawyers representing 9/11 families are asking a federal judge to find Iran culpable in the Sept. 11 terror attacks, saying new evidence shows Iranian officials had advanced word of the attacks and helped train the hijackers.

The lawyers filed papers Thursday in U.S. District Court in Manhattan saying there is "clear and convincing" evidence to conclude default judgment damages should be paid to their plaintiffs -families and personal representatives of some of those killed in the attacks.

Supporting their arguments, the lawyers cited the testimony of three defectors from Iran's intelligence service, the Ministry of Information and Security, saying they worked in positions that gave them access to sensitive information regarding Iran's state sponsorship of terrorism. They said the testimony, part of 28 hours of testimony by four witnesses, supports a claim that Iranian officials had advanced word of the attacks and that Iran helped train those who carried it out.

Iran has not responded to the lawsuit, which was first filed in Washington, D.C., and later transferred to New York. A message was left Friday with the Iranian mission to the United Nations.

The Shiite regime in Iran and al-Qaida, a Sunni group, are natural enemies, though they have sometimes had a relationship of convenience based on their shared hatred of the U.S.

The lawyers said Iran and "its proxy terrorist organization," the Lebanese group Hezbollah, entered into a terrorist alliance with al-Qaida in the early 1990s that continued throughout the preparations for the 2001 attacks. They said Iran and Hezbollah gave material support to al-Qaida after the attacks by helping some of the terrorist group's leaders and their families escape from the U.S.-led invasion of Afghanistan.

As part of their proof, the lawyers said they were filing videotaped testimony under seal in which three defectors from Iran's intelligence service "circumstantially and directly" implicate Iran and Hezbollah in the Sept. 11 attacks. Iran and Hezbollah had "foreknowledge of, and complicity in, the overall design of, and preparations for, the 9/11 attacks, involving, but not limited to, facilitation of the hijackers' international travel, training and through Iran provision of safe haven for al-Qaida after the attacks," the lawyers wrote.

They said the witnesses, identified in court documents only as "Witnesses X, Y and Z," also provided testimony revealing that then-senior Hezbollah operative Imad Mughniyah had an integral role in the Iran-Hezbollah-al-Qaida terror alliance. One of the witnesses testified that Iran anticipated a retaliatory strike against Iran if its role in the 9/11 attacks was discovered. Mughniyah died in a car bombing in 2008.

TEXT 2

ABA Accreditation for Law School in China Runs Up Against U.S. Job Fears

Anthony Lin All Articles

The Asian Lawyer

May 24, 2011

Dean Jeffrey Lehman is generally pleased with the progress of the new law school he oversees. The former dean of University of Michigan Law School and onetime president of Cornell University has seen enrollment at the three-year-old school go from 53 extremely bright and highly motivated students per class to 80.

He will also soon have recruited eight full-time faculty members to work alongside a star-studded roster of visiting faculty that has included Harvard professors Charles Ogletree and Jack Goldsmith. Ground will be broken later this year on a stunning new Kohn Pedersen Fox-designed law school building.

The one sticking point has been accreditation by the American Bar Association. Which seems like it should be a no-brainer, except that this law school is located in Shenzhen, China.

Lehman has long hoped to make the Peking University School of Transnational Law (STL) the first law school outside the United States to be accredited by the ABA, which would allow its graduates to take the bar exam in any U.S. state.

Though its students are almost all Chinese, the school teaches a predominantly U.S. law curriculum in English and employs a faculty whose members mostly hold J.D.s from American law schools. Lehman and other supporters see the school as promoting U.S. law and the values behind it as a sort of legal lingua franca in an increasingly globalized world.

But that aim has run headlong into the still-weak U.S. legal job market. Fears of a tide of new overseas competition for scarce work were evident in many of the 60 comments the ABA received in response to a special-committee report released last fall recommending the accreditation section begin considering foreign schools.

"As a long-time ABA member, I have no doubt why so many people refuse to join the association or leave shortly after joining," wrote Kelley Drye & Warren partner Steven Moore. "This proposal makes absolutely no sense, unless we just want to implode the legal field in the United States and get our unemployment rate in the double digits for decades to come."

A number of law student groups have voiced similar economic arguments. The student bar association of the University of Nebraska-Lincoln College of Law said the proposal would have "an unjustifiable impact upon employment for current and future attorneys from the United States."

Several law school deans expressed concern that accrediting foreign schools would undermine their L.L.M. programs. Such programs, they argue, offer foreign law students critical immersion in U.S. culture they would not receive at overseas schools like STL. Fordham Law School Dean Michael Martin wrote that lower-cost overseas schools could under-price U.S. schools, leading to a "race to the bottom" that "would ultimately have the effect of eroding our system of legal education."

TEXT 3

Will Chabad Case Affect Dispute Over Artwork Taken by Nazis?

Zoe Tillman All Articles

The National Law Journal

May 23, 2011

As attorneys for the Chabad-Lubavitch movement press on with attempts to retrieve texts stolen by the Nazis and now held by the Russian government, a case involving efforts to reclaim an art collection also taken by the Nazis is just getting under way.

In a case filed last July in U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, the descendants of Baron Mor Lipot Herzog, a wealthy Jewish Hungarian art collector, are suing the Hungarian government for the return of Herzog's collection. According to the complaint (PDF), the paintings were seized by the Nazis during World War II from Herzog's family.

The Hungarian government filed a motion to dismiss (PDF) in February, arguing that the court lacks jurisdiction under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (FSIA). Herzog's heirs filed their opposition (PDF) earlier this month, and the Hungarian government has until June 15 to respond.

Similar arguments for dismissal under the FSIA were lodged unsuccessfully by the Russian government in the Chabad case. U.S. District Court Chief Judge Royce Lamberth and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit both denied Russia's motion to dismiss, but attorneys in this case disagree on whether the precedent set in Chabad will apply.

Michael Shuster of New York's Kasowitz, Benson, Torres & Friedman, who is representing Herzog's heirs, pointed to two arguments for exception under the FSIA that were cited by the appellate court in Chabad -- first, that the plaintiffs are arguing the objects in question were taken in violation of international law; and second, that the foreign government does business in the U.S.

"Provided that the standards are met for coming within one of the exceptions to the FSIA, I think the U.S. federal courts haven't shied away from entertaining these cases notwithstanding that they involved foreign sovereigns and events that go back in time," he said in a phone interview Wednesday.

But lead counsel for Hungary, Thaddeus Stauber of Washington's Nixon Peabody, said in a phone interview Wednesday there are too many differences in the underlying cases for Chabad to apply. Besides arguing that the plaintiffs failed to prove exceptions to immunity under the FSIA, Hungary is also arguing that a 1973 agreement with the U.S. government settled these types of claims and precludes future litigation.

Stauber pointed to claims made in filings that the Hungarian government set up compensation programs for losses that took place during and after World War II, and made restitution to the Herzog family when they brought claims to Hungarian courts. "The Hungarian state is the rightful owner" of the artwork in question, he said.

TEXT 4

U.K. Prime Minister Wades Into Privacy Debate as Injunction Controversy Heats Up

Suzi Ring All Articles

Legal Week

May 24, 2011

Privacy law has continued to dominate the headlines, with U.K. Prime Minister David Cameron on Monday wading into the row about the sustainability of privacy injunctions after Twitter users continued to flout court orders over the weekend.

Speaking on ITV's "Daybreak" program Monday morning Cameron called for privacy laws to be reviewed. He described current laws affecting newspapers as "unsustainable" and said Parliament was "going to have to take some time out to really have a think about this."

His words came after a weekend that saw injunctions continue to dominate the attention of newspapers and social networking sites like Twitter, as the debate intensified about the justification for such privacy orders and their applicability in today's era of digital media.

On Sunday, a Scottish newspaper chose to flout the injunction by publishing a barely concealed picture of a footballer who has taken out an injunction over his alleged affair with former "Big Brother" contestant Imogen Thomas. It is unclear the extent, if any, to which an injunction issued in England applies to Scotland.

The Sun newspaper on Monday submitted an application to challenge the existing Imogen Thomas injunction on the basis of the publication in Scotland.

There have also been newspaper reports that Attorney General Dominic Grieve has been asked to consider a prosecution following an alleged breach of an injunction by a journalist on Twitter concerning another footballer in the case known as TSE against News Group Newspapers.

However, Mr Justice Tugendhat on Monday said: "I have not received any request to refer to the attorney general in this case in which the claimant is referred to as TSE, and I have not referred it to him."

The frenzied debate on social media sites had already been stoked on Friday when it emerged that a claimant identified as CTB had launched a High Court action against Twitter and a number of its users in relation to the reporting of an injunction.

The action is an attempt to force the social media site to disclose details of a number of Twitter users thought to be behind the publication of confidential information. The case has further underlined claims that privacy laws are out of step with the realities of social media given the challenge of forcing the California-based company to comply with a disclosure order from an English court.

The latest developments also come after the committee charged with reviewing the use of superinjunctions on Friday called for the media to have advance notice of privacy orders and for the Government to monitor the use of injunctions. The committee, chaired by Master of the Rolls Lord Neuberger, argued that the current regime for granting injunctions is working effectively.

TEXT 5

Appointment of Joint U.S.-U.K. Corporate Monitor Signals New Era in Bribery Enforcement

Nate Raymond All Articles

The American Lawyer

May 23, 2011

For companies looking to get out of the crosshairs of Department of Justice by agreeing to a deferred prosecution agreement, the appointment of a corporate monitor has become a familiar condition, particularly in Foreign Corrupt Practices Act cases.

Now, in a sign of its own growing anti-corruption efforts, the United Kingdom has been getting into the monitor game. Hughes Hubbard & Reed announced May 12 that partner Kevin Abikoff has been hired by Innospec Inc. to act as compliance monitor as part of a $40.2 million bribery settlement it reached in March 2010 with the U.S. Department of Justice, Securities and Exchange Commission, and the U.K. Serious Fraud Office. Innospec pleaded guilty to federal charges related to alleged kickbacks to the Iraqi government in the U.N. oil-for-food program and for violating the U.S. embargo with Cuba.

The position is the first-ever joint U.S.-U.K monitorship. Abikoff told us he is only the second monitor appointed by the Serious Fraud Office. Mabey & Johnson, which pleaded guilty in July 2009 in the first successful U.K. prosecution of foreign bribery, was similarly required to hire a monitor.

"It's absolutely part and parcel and consistent with the U.K.'s ramped up anti-corruption efforts," Abikoff said.

Companies have been fretting over compliance requirements in anticipation of enforcement of the U.K. Bribery Act, which, after much delay, is set to go into effect July 1. After companies voiced concern over how the law, often called the "FCPA on steroids," would be enforced, the government signaled in March it would take a softer line than initially feared.

Regardless, questions linger about the compliance efforts companies will need to take. With Innospec under monitorship, Abikoff said he expects the Serious Fraud Office will use his position and reports to view "at least one company's compliance with those efforts."

Innospec disclosed May 11 in its quarterly report that it expected to take a $3.9 million charge for the expected cost of the compliance monitor. Aware of past criticism of the costs of monitors, Abikoff said Hughes Hubbard is "approaching this one with full integrity but efficiency." (Abikoff said he was engaged in January but the firm waited to disclose its involvement until after the quarterly report.)

Kirkland & Ellis represented Innospec in the March 2010 settlement.

TEXT 6