Muutke küpsiste eelistusi

E-raamat: Interregional Recognition and Enforcement of Civil and Commercial Judgments: Lessons for China from US and EU Law

(University of Sydney Law School, Australia)
  • Formaat - PDF+DRM
  • Hind: 117,00 €*
  • * hind on lõplik, st. muud allahindlused enam ei rakendu
  • Lisa ostukorvi
  • Lisa soovinimekirja
  • See e-raamat on mõeldud ainult isiklikuks kasutamiseks. E-raamatuid ei saa tagastada.
  • Raamatukogudele
    • Hart e-raamatud

DRM piirangud

  • Kopeerimine (copy/paste):

    ei ole lubatud

  • Printimine:

    ei ole lubatud

  • Kasutamine:

    Digitaalõiguste kaitse (DRM)
    Kirjastus on väljastanud selle e-raamatu krüpteeritud kujul, mis tähendab, et selle lugemiseks peate installeerima spetsiaalse tarkvara. Samuti peate looma endale  Adobe ID Rohkem infot siin. E-raamatut saab lugeda 1 kasutaja ning alla laadida kuni 6'de seadmesse (kõik autoriseeritud sama Adobe ID-ga).

    Vajalik tarkvara
    Mobiilsetes seadmetes (telefon või tahvelarvuti) lugemiseks peate installeerima selle tasuta rakenduse: PocketBook Reader (iOS / Android)

    PC või Mac seadmes lugemiseks peate installima Adobe Digital Editionsi (Seeon tasuta rakendus spetsiaalselt e-raamatute lugemiseks. Seda ei tohi segamini ajada Adober Reader'iga, mis tõenäoliselt on juba teie arvutisse installeeritud )

    Seda e-raamatut ei saa lugeda Amazon Kindle's. 

Judgment recognition and enforcement (JRE) between the US states, between EU Member States, and between mainland China, Hong Kong and Macao, are all forms of 'interregional JRE'. This extensive comparative study of the three most important JRE regimes focuses on what lessons China can draw from the US and the EU in developing a multilateral JRE arrangement for mainland China, Hong Kong and Macao.Mainland China, Hong Kong and Macao share economic, geographical, cultural, and historical proximity to one another. The policy of 'One Country, Two Systems' also provides a quasi-constitutional regime for the three regions. However, there is no multilateral JRE scheme among them, as there is in the US and the EU; and it is harder to recognise and enforce sister-region judgments in China than in the US and the EU. The book analyses the status quo of JRE in China and explores its insufficiencies; it proposes a multilateral JRE arrangement for Chinese regions to alleviate current JRE difficulties; and it also provides solutions for the macro and micro challenges of establishing a multilateral arrangement, drawing upon the rich literature on JRE regimes found in the US and the EU.



ENDORSEMENTS 'Professor Huang has completed a highly readable and comprehensive study of the issues governing recognition and enforcement of judgments among the three distinct legal regimes of the People's Republic of ChinaHer ideas will surely enrich the Chinese debate as well as provide interesting scholarly material for non-Chinese seeking greater understanding of legal reform in the PRC'. Peter D Trooboff, Senior Counsel, Covington & Burling LLP, Washington DC, USA

'The book shows meticulous, analytical and comparative scholarship. Dr Huang's proposal of a multilateral arrangement makes an original and valuable contribution to the study of interregional judgment recognition and enforcement among Mainland China, Hong Kong, and Macao'. Renshan Liu, Professor and Dean, Law School of Zhongnan University of Economics and Law, China

'Dr Huang's timely work provides an insightful analysis of one of the more vexed aspects of the inter-regional legal relations in Greater China. Her careful investigation makes a valuable contribution to the academic and practical work on the recognition and enforcement of judgments between China and her two special administrative regions. The comparative approach she adopts represents the true utility of comparativism for legal scholarship'. Bing Ling, Professor of Chinese Law, Sydney Law School, Australia



PREFACE AND FOREWORD Please click on the link below to read the preface and foreword: www.hartpub.co.uk/Huang_Preface_Foreword.pdf

The book won the First Prize for Excellent Scholarship awarded by the China Society of Private International Law in 2015.

Arvustused

A valuable monograph, which grants access to the practice of recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments in China, and clarifies the particularities of Chinese jurisdiction in relation to Macao and Hong Kong -- Apostolos Anthimos * Armenopoulos (the Thessaloniki Bar Review), 5 *

Series Editors' Preface vii
Foreword ix
Acknowledgements xi
1 Introduction 1(32)
A Introduction: Theme and Contribution of this Book
1(4)
B Concept of Interregional JRE
5(1)
C A Comparative Perspective
6(17)
i Introduction to the Method: Comparative Studies
7(4)
ii Free Circulation of Judgments in the US
11(4)
1 Historical Backgrounds
11(2)
2 The Full Faith and Credit JRE System
13(2)
iii Free Circulation of Judgments in the EU
15(5)
1 Historical Backgrounds
15(2)
2 The Brussels I Regulation
17(3)
iv Current JRE System in China
20(3)
1 No Overarching Multilateral JRE Scheme and Insufficient Substantive Laws
21(1)
2 JRE Impasse for the Majority of Judgments between Mainland China and Hong Kong
22(1)
D The Need for, and Feasibility of, a Multilateral JRE Arrangement
23(9)
i Need: Economic Integration
23(3)
ii Feasibility
26(7)
1 Geographical, Cultural and Historical Proximities among the Three Regions
26(1)
2 Constitutional Framework Overarching Mainland China, Hong Kong and Macao
27(2)
3 Contributions of the Existing Bilateral Arrangements
29(3)
E Structure of What Follows
32(1)
2 Scholarly Achievements in Chinese Interregional Conflict of Laws 33(24)
A General Theory of Chinese Interregional Conflict of Laws
33(5)
i A Theoretical Postulate
34(2)
ii Feasible Solutions to Interregional Conflicts
36(1)
iii Assessments
37(1)
B Interregional Judgment Recognition and Enforcement
38(12)
i Necessity for Interregional JRE
39(2)
ii Ways of Improving Interregional JRE
41(2)
iii Comments on the Current Two JRE Arrangements
43(6)
iv Assessments
49(1)
C Comparative Studies
50(7)
i Value of Comparative Studies
50(4)
ii Foreign Models for Resolving Interregional Legal Conflicts
54(2)
iii Assessments
56(1)
3 The Existing JRE System among Mainland China, Hong Kong and Macao 57(71)
A Regional JRE Laws
58(40)
i Legal Bases for JRE
58(13)
1 Statute
58(7)
a Mainland China
58(6)
b Macao
64(1)
c Hong Kong
64(1)
2 Common Law
65(1)
3 Insufficient Legal Bases for JRE outside the Mainland-Hong Kong Arrangement
66(5)
ii Requirements for JRE: Legally Effective, Enforceable or Final
71(3)
1 Mainland China
72(1)
2 Macao
73(1)
3 Hong Kong
73(1)
iii Grounds for Refusing JRE
74(23)
1 Incompetent Indirect Jurisdiction
77(4)
a Mainland China
77(1)
b Macao
78(1)
c Hong Kong
79(2)
2 Unfair Procedures
81(6)
a Mainland China
81(3)
b Macao
84(1)
c Hong Kong
85(2)
3 Res Judicata
87(2)
a Mainland China
87(1)
b Macao
88(1)
c Hong Kong
89(1)
4 Public Policy Exception
89(6)
a Mainland China
89(1)
b Macao
90(1)
c Hong Kong
91(4)
5 Fraud
95(3)
a Common Law Regime
95(2)
b Statutory Regime
97(1)
iv Problems of Regional JRE Laws
97(1)
B Interregional JRE Laws
98(28)
i Mainland-Hong Kong Arrangement
98(14)
1 Scope of the Arrangement
99(4)
a Choice of Court Agreements
100(1)
b Judgments in Civil and Commercial Cases
100(1)
c Monetary Judgments
100(1)
d Types of Judicial Awards
101(1)
e Levels of Courts
102(1)
f Interregional
102(1)
2 Requirements for JRE
103(1)
3 Grounds for Refusing JRE
104(7)
a Invalid Choice of Court Agreement
104(1)
b Wholly Satisfied Judgment
105(1)
c Exclusive Jurisdiction
105(1)
d Unfair Procedure
106(2)
e Fraud
108(1)
f Res Judicata
109(1)
g Public Policy Exception
110(1)
4 Assessment and Conclusion
111(1)
ii The Mainland-Macao Arrangement
112(10)
1 Scope of the Arrangement
112(3)
a Judgments in Civil and Commercial Cases
112(1)
b Monetary and Non-monetary Judgments
113(1)
c Types of Judicial Awards
113(1)
d Levels of Courts
114(1)
2 Requirements for JRE
115(1)
3 Grounds for Refusing JRE
115(6)
a Exclusive Jurisdiction
116(1)
b Res Judicata
116(2)
c Unfair Procedure
118(1)
d Public Policy Exception
119(2)
4 Assessment and Conclusion
121(1)
iii JRE under Multilateral Conventions
122(4)
C The Next Stage: a Multilateral JRE Arrangement
126(2)
4 Three Serious Macro Challenges and their Solutions 128(40)
A Conflicts between Socialist Law and Capitalist Law
130(16)
i Mainland China's Modernization of its Civil and Commercial Law
131(11)
1 Legislation
131(7)
a Contract Law: Endorsing Party Autonomy
134(1)
b Company Law: Equalizing Private and Public Market Players
135(2)
c Property Law: Protecting Private Ownership
137(1)
2 Adjudication
138(3)
3 Conclusion
141(1)
ii Judgments against Mainland Governments
142(4)
1 Mainland Public Institutions
142(2)
2 Interregional Public Policy Exception
144(2)
B Conflicts between Civil Law and Common Law
146(10)
i Jurisdiction
146(7)
ii JRE
153(3)
C Weak Mutual Trust
156(10)
i Socialism versus Capitalism
157(1)
ii Differences among Regional Legal Systems
158(8)
D Conclusion
166(2)
5 Selected Rules of the Proposed Multilateral JRE Arrangement 168(93)
A Scope
169(21)
i Civil and Commercial Judgments
172(14)
1 'Civil and Commercial' versus 'Administrative'
173(4)
2 Judgments for Personal Consumption Disputes
177(1)
3 Civil Compensation Collateral to Criminal Proceedings
178(1)
4 Judgments for Employment Disputes
179(1)
5 Judgments on Insolvency and Related Issues
180(4)
6 Judgments on Family Law Issues
184(2)
7 Summary
186(1)
ii Levels of Courts
186(2)
iii Types of Judicial Awards
188(2)
B Requirement for JRE: Finality
190(29)
i Different Criteria of 'Finality' in Mainland China and Hong Kong
191(6)
1 Criteria of 'Finality' under Mainland JRE Law
191(5)
2 Criteria of 'Finality' under Hong Kong JRE Law: Chiyu and its Progeny
196(1)
ii Conflicts brought about by the Different Criteria of Finality
197(15)
1 Problems of Chiyu
197(5)
2 Reasons for Chiyu
202(5)
3 Malicious Re-Litigations and Forum Shopping Caused by the Chiyu Doctrine
207(4)
4 The Preferable Minority Approach in Hong Kong Courts
211(1)
iii Proposed Solutions to the Finality Dispute
212(6)
1 Amend Hong Kong Law
212(1)
2 Amend the Mainland CPL
213(2)
3 Interregional Law Approaches
215(5)
a Provide an Autonomous Terminology for Finality
215(3)
b Apply the Law of the Judgment-Rendering Region
218(1)
iv Conclusion
218(1)
C Grounds for Refusing JRE
219(41)
i Incompetent Indirect Jurisdiction
220(17)
1 Direct and Indirect Jurisdiction
220(7)
a JRE Difficulties brought about by Different Regional Direct and Indirect Jurisdiction Laws
220(3)
b Single Enforcement Arrangement
223(3)
c Three Categories of Indirect Jurisdiction
226(1)
2 Required Indirect Jurisdiction
227(6)
a The Defendant has His or Her Domicile or Habitual Residence in the Region where the Judgment-Rendering Court is Located
227(1)
b The Defendant has a Representative Office in the Region where the Court is Located and the Action is Related to the Activities of the Office
228(1)
c Jurisdiction based on a Choice of Court Agreement
228(5)
d Jurisdiction based on Submission
233(1)
3 Excluded Indirect Jurisdiction
233(3)
a Exclusive Jurisdiction over Certain Disputes of Joint Ventures
234(1)
b Jurisdiction of the Place where the Contract is Signed
234(1)
c Jurisdiction by Service on a Defendant Who Temporarily Appears
235(1)
4 Permitted Indirect Jurisdiction
236(1)
ii Unfair Procedure
237(5)
1 Three Instances
237(3)
2 Losing Party or Defendant
240(1)
3 Obligation of Challenging a Judgment on the Ground of Unfair Procedure in the Judgment-rendering Court
241(1)
4 Conclusion
242(1)
iii Res Judicata
242(5)
1 Conflicts between a Requested Judgment and a Recognized Judgment
243(1)
2 Conflicts between a Requested Judgment and a Local Judgment
243(1)
3 Same Cause of Action
244(1)
4 Same Parties
245(1)
5 Conclusion
246(1)
iv Fraud
247(5)
1 Autonomous Terminology
247(3)
2 Review of Fraud in F2
250(2)
v Public Policy Exception
252(7)
1 Necessity of Preserving a Public Policy Exception
252(4)
2 Substantive and Procedural Public Policy Exception
256(3)
iv Exhaustive List
259(1)
D Summary
260(1)
6 Implementation of the Proposed Multilateral JRE Arrangement 261(15)
A Legal Form
261(5)
i Amending the PRC Constitution
261(2)
ii Enacting a National JRE Law
263(1)
iii Proposing Model Laws
264(1)
iv Adopting Interregional Arrangement plus Separate Regional Legislation
265(1)
B Coordination Mechanism for Implementing the Proposed Multilateral JRE Arrangement
266(8)
i Exchanging Information about the Specific Judgments that are to be Enforced
269(2)
ii Maintaining Interpretational Uniformity
271(1)
iii Proposed Coordination Organization
271(3)
C Relationship with Other Interregional and International JRE Instruments
274(2)
7 Conclusion 276(3)
Appendices 279(46)
1 The Mainland-Hong Kong Arrangement
281(11)
2 The Mainland-Macao Arrangement
292(7)
3 Mainland Judgments
299(26)
Index 325
Jie Huang is an Associate Professor of Law and Associate Dean at Shanghai University of International Business and Economics School of Law and Director of China Association of Private International Law.