Student’s name

Instructor

Course

Date

Final Decision

In this case, the determination of justice depends on the documents, how the contract was upheld and respected as well as the pleadings of both sides. The claimant did not honor the contract in regards to the payment part of the business. However, it is also important to note that the respondent did not refuse the goods from being dispatched and therefore they were released and came towards Delaware. This means that the respondent needed the goods and was ready to pick them. However when the respondent refuses to pay for the goods then it can be seen as a way of trying to do away with justice. This is because even from a common-sense perspective the goods are more important than the discrepancies which arose due to the documents not being in the correct order or manner.

If the respondent was good enough he would have organized with the seller on how the payment could have been done. On the other side, the buyer never did this. It means therefore that the claimant will win because of the above-given situations. The reason for the refusal of the arguments on the side of the respondent is that the respondent should have terminated business if he realized that it was too risky and if he could not pay. Also, the respondent keeps on requesting for discount which means his intention is failure to pay to get a discount and earn more from the seller. With this intention alone it is true to say that the claimant wins the case. This judgment is fair enough because making the respondent the winner leads to the exploitation of the seller through discount by the buyer. The seller also goes at very many losses because of transportation if the respondent wins.

Works cited

Park, William, W. Laurence Craig, and Jan Paulsson. International chamber of commerce arbitration. 2000.