Essay Undergraduate 787 words

Business Ethics and Natural Law in Banking Disputes

~4 min read

Abstract

This paper examines a dispute between a bank customer and his bank over a promotional offer that was withdrawn without prior notification. Applying natural law theory — which holds that law must account for the morality of a situation — the paper argues that the bank is obligated to honor the customer's claim. Key considerations include the three-month timeframe of the offer, the lack of advance notice to the customer, the bank's responsibility for transparent conduct, and the long-term reputational and financial interests of the institution. The analysis draws on Mallor et al.'s framework of business law and Ferrell, Fraedrich, and Ferrell's work on ethical business decision-making.

📝 How to Write This Type of Paper Writing guide — click to expand

▼

What makes this paper effective

The paper consistently anchors its argument in a named legal and ethical framework — natural law — giving each claim a principled foundation rather than relying on opinion alone.
It anticipates and acknowledges counterarguments (e.g., the bank may not be technically required to honor the offer) before rebutting them, which strengthens credibility.
The paper broadens its analysis beyond the individual dispute to consider reputational and public relations consequences, showing awareness of real-world business context.

Key academic technique demonstrated

The paper demonstrates applied ethical reasoning: it takes an abstract framework (natural law) and systematically applies it to a concrete fact pattern. Rather than simply asserting what is fair, the author connects moral principles to legal obligations and then extends the argument to practical business outcomes, showing how ethical theory and self-interest can align.

Structure breakdown

The paper opens with a thesis stating the ruling and its legal basis, then devotes successive paragraphs to: (1) the notification failure and its ethical implications, (2) natural law's requirement of moral accountability, (3) the mutual benefit of honoring the claim supported by a textbook citation, and (4) a concluding restatement that ties individual fairness to the bank's broader public image. The structure is tightly linear, making the argument easy to follow.

Introduction: Business Ethics and the Role of Natural Law

Business ethics are complex, and there is often no single correct ruling with regard to a given situation. When assessing a particular case, one must take into consideration a number of factors. Nevertheless, business ethics are especially pertinent in today's economy; not only has ethical conduct become a major concern in business today, but unethical financial conduct has lowered consumer trust in business (Mallor et al., p. 8). Business law is multifaceted, encompassing a number of branches, including constitutions, common law, and treatises (Mallor et al.). The case between the bank customer and his bank involves common law, which is used for settling disputes.

In deciding on a ruling for the case, this paper applies natural law, which states that law should take into account the morality of the situation (Mallor et al.). The ruling is that the bank should ultimately be obligated to honor the customer's claim. The specific reasons for this ruling are that the offer mentioned a time period of three months, such that withdrawing an offer without notice constitutes poor business ethics.

The Obligation to Notify: Transparency and Fair Dealing

The customer's claim should be honored because he was not notified beforehand that the offer was going to be withdrawn. Despite the fact that the company may not have foreseen the need to withdraw the offer, businesses must be as transparent as possible — either notifying customers in advance of any upcoming changes or agreeing to honor existing commitments for a specified period of time. The fact that the customer joined the bank only after the offer was enacted suggests that the initiative was designed with the goal of attracting new customers. It is therefore misleading to deny customers the very terms that had convinced them to join the bank in the first place.

2 Locked Sections · 225 words remaining

Natural Law and the Morality of Withdrawing an Offer · 80 words

"Moral accountability for advertised promotional terms"

Mutual Benefit: Why Honoring the Claim Serves Both Parties · 145 words

"Ethical reputation benefits bank and customer alike"

Conclusion: Natural Law Mandates Honoring the Customer's Claim

Certainly, it is true that the customer likely should have been more prudent in filing his application, but if the company advertises that the offer will last for three months, he would have had no way of knowing that the offer would be withdrawn. As it stands, the company appears to have been attempting to attract new customers without adequately considering the well-being of those who entrusted them with their financial records. Therefore, natural law mandates that the bank must honor the customer's claim, and such a decision is actually in the best interests of both parties.

You’re 49% through this paper. Sign up to read the remaining 2 sections.

130,000+ paper examples AI writing assistant Citation generator Cancel anytime

Key Concepts in This Paper

Natural Law Business Ethics Consumer Trust Promotional Offer Fair Dealing Common Law Corporate Transparency Reputational Risk Ethical Conduct Banking Dispute