One-Way Analysis of Variance with SPSS Coursework

One-Way Analysis of Variance with SPSS - Coursework Example Using results from the Tukey HSD test, it is observed that there are several comparisons listed in the table. For instance, in the first row, we can see the comparison between group 1 and the other two groups. Following this table across, we see that the difference of means between group 1 and the other two groups is significant. However, the difference in means between group 2 and 3 is not significant (p-value = 0.999). The results are consistent with our findings based on the ANOVA test in which the p-value was significant as it is less than 0.05. The significance of the p-value (from the ANOVA test) is observed due to the significant difference of means between groups 1 and 2 and 1 and 3. Using results based on main effects and post-hoc statistical test, in this case Tukey HSD test, we reject the null hypothesis and conclude that there is a significant difference between the three groups. In other words, there is a difference between the means of the three

Product Liability Claims in the UK Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 4500 words

Product Liability Claims in the UK - Essay Example However, such inequities cannot be redressed through the law, since they arise from political and judicial differences that exist in the U.K. and Japan. As compared to Western law systems, especially in the U.K. which is governed by the EU and UK Competition law that prohibits any interference with competition, in Japanese law systems traditional theories still predominate and the only remedy available is to introduce litigation to annul an administrative act, unlike the U.K. where there are five kinds of remedies: mandamus, certiorari, prohibition, injunction and declaration (www.iias.nl).In a class action case dealing with UK tax treaties with Japan and other countries, the UK Court found bilateral treaty discrimination and reached a similar decision as in Metallgesellschaft/Hoechst v. CIR(European Court of Justice), where the EU treaty prohibits such discrimination to In the case of NEC Semi-Conductors Ltd, et al. v. CIR (November 24, 2003), the UK Court’s conclusions about discrimination were based upon the freedom of establishment principle, under Article 43 of the EU Treaty (www.bnatax.com). However, as opposed to this case law of U.K. Courts deciding in favor of establishments outside the U.K. being protected from discrimination, recent Japanese decisions on product liability claims reveal an opposite trend. The decision of the Nagoya District Court on 30th June 1995 went against MacDonalds and they were held liable for damages revealing that Japanese courts do not impose a burden of proof in civil proceedings (Nottage, 2000). Â