What are the bonding requirements when offering a contest? In Florida and New York, a deposit equal to the total value of the prizes offered must be paid at the time of registration. What should be done once the contest winners have been selected? The records of the contest winner(s) must be kept for a period of at least 4 years. If the draw is binding, the Sponsor must also send a list of winners to Florida and New York. Other states require the publication of lists of winners. In addition, in some cases, the input material must be retained for a defined period of time. In times of war, warring states may attempt to disrupt maritime trade to prevent ships from carrying goods that support an adversary`s war effort. Once the ships have been captured and taken to a friendly port, a local tribunal called a jury decides the legality of seizing or destroying the ship and cargo if the ship cannot be taken to a friendly port. Customary international law and treaties, which determine the appropriateness of such acts, are called price law. Although Anglo-American common law precedents are the most accessible description of price law, in price cases, courts interpret and apply international customs and customs, international law, rather than the laws or precedents of a country. [6] Typically, however, the hijacker put a prize crew on board to sail a captured ship to the nearest port of his own or allied country. where a jury could decide the prize.
If, during the voyage, a friendly ship recovered the prize, which was called rescue, the Postliminium Act returned ownership of the saved prize to its previous owners. That is, the ship did not become a prize of the reconquest ship. However, rescuers were entitled to compensation for the rescue,[22] as if they had saved a crippled ship from sinking at sea. [23] A major difference between price law and ordinary Anglo-American criminal law is the reversal of the normal burden of proof. [30] Whereas in criminal courts a defendant is innocent until proven guilty, a ship is guilty before a jury unless his innocence is proven. [31] Price pirates need only show a “reasonable suspicion” that the property will be condemned; The burden of proof to the contrary lies with the owner. [32] The Board members collected witness statements at the written hearings using standard forms. [28] The Admiralty courts rarely heard live testimony.
The commissioners` interrogations attempted to determine the relative size, speed and strength of the ships, what signals were exchanged and what fighting followed, the location of capture, the state of the weather and “the degree of light or dark” and what other ships were in sight. Indeed, the Marine Rates Act gave a share of revenues to auxiliary vessels, defined as those that were “within signal distance” at the time. The ship`s written interrogations and documents determined the nationality of the ship and its crew, as well as the origin and destination of the cargo: the ship had been “confiscated by its own mouth.” [29] In his book The Prize Game, Donald Petrie writes: “At first, accepting prizes was just beating and grabbing, like breaking a jeweler`s window, but by the fifteenth century a body of guiding rules, the law of the sea of nations, had begun to develop and gain international recognition.” [1] Grotius` seminal treatise on international law, entitled De Iure Praedae Commentarius (Commentary on the Law of Price and Booty), published in 1604 and founding the doctrine of the freedom of the seas in chapter 12, “Mare Liberum”, was among other things a letter from a lawyer justifying the Dutch confiscation of Spanish and Portuguese ships. [2] Grotius defends the practice of accepting prices not only as traditional or customary, but also as fair. His commentary points out that the etymology of the name of the Greek god of war, Ares, was the verb “to seize” and that the law of nations had considered the plundering of enemy property legal since the beginning of Western history recorded in Homeric times. [3] Fortunes in prizes had to be made at sea, as vividly illustrated by the novels of C. S. Forester and Patrick O`Brian. During the American Revolution, the combined prices of the U.S.
Navy and privateers amounted to nearly $24 million; [7] During the War of 1812: $45 million. [8] Such enormous revenues were made when $200 was a generous annual salary for a seafarer; [9] His share of a single prize could yield ten or twenty times his annual salary, and it was customary to win five or six prizes in one trip. The prize, which returned to land from the hijacked ship or an ally who had approved a price procedure, was sued in an Admiralty court – meaning “against the cause”, against the ship itself. For this reason. Price decisions are named after the ship, such as The Rapid (a U.S. Supreme Court case in which goods purchased before the outbreak of hostilities become smuggled once war is declared)[24] or The Elsebe (Lord Stowell believes that juries enforce rights under international law and not just under the law of their country of origin). [25] An appropriate conviction by the jury was essential to give the new owners clear ownership of a vessel and its cargo and to resolve the issue. Upton`s Treaty states: “Even after four years of possession and the conduct of several voyages, title is not changed without conviction.” [26] Price under the law of a ship, aircraft or goods acquired by capture by a belligerent State, subject to the judgment of a jury.
“Capture” and “price” are not synonymous, and a legal conclusion that the seized property is a good price, according to the accepted definition, is necessary before the hijacker can exercise economic rights over it. A judgment of condemnation declares that the prize is the property of the captured sovereign and may be accompanied by a purchase order under which an internationally valid title is awarded. Im 18. In the nineteenth century, the title of a sentence sometimes changed simply because of capture, but because of the modern custom of nations, a judicial inquiry must refer the case. Within certain vague limits, international law leaves it to national choice as to the nature of the legal process and the definition of objectionable ships and goods. Shortly before World War II, the France passed a prize winning law, as did the Netherlands and Norway, although the German invasion and subsequent surrender of the three countries quickly put an end to this. [ref. needed] Britain officially ended the eligibility of naval officers to participate in the cash prize in 1948.
[50] Presenting the prize to a jury can be impractical for a number of reasons, such as bad weather, lack of crew, dwindling water and supplies, or proximity to a super-powerful enemy force – in which case a ship could be ransomed. That is, instead of destroying them on the spot, as was their prerogative, the privateer or naval officer accepted a certificate in the form of a promissory note for an agreed sum as a ransom from the captain.