Issue: What effect, by way of limitation or expansion, does Washington’s Uniform Commercial Code have on a Washington based company’s ability to defend against a Hong Kong manufacturer’s breach of contract claims?
|Area of Law:||International Law & Global Trade, UCC & Secured Transactions|
|Keywords:||Express warranties; Effect of limitation or expansion; Breach of contract claims|
|Cited Statutes:||RCW § 62A.2-313, § 62A.2-314, § 62A.2-315|
The applicable rules make clear that a mediator is entitled to (1) notice and an opportunity to respond prior to imposition of a sanction; and (2) a hearing by the Judicial Council’s Ad Hoc committee.
(3)(J) The committee shall approve and publish procedures consistent with this rule to be used in imposing the sanction. The complainant shall file a written and signed complaint with the director. The director shall notify the provider in writing of the complaint and provide an opportunity to respond. The director may interview the complainant, the provider and any parties involved. Upon consideration of all factors, the director may impose a sanction and notify the complainant and the provider. If the provider seeks to challenge the sanction, the provider must notify the director within 10 days of receipt of the notification. The provider may request reconsideration by the director or a hearing by the Judicial Council’s ad hoc committee on ADR. The decision of the committee is final.
Judicial Council Rules of Judicial Administration, ch. 4, art. 5, R. 4-510, § (3)(I), (J).