Interregional recognition and enforcement of civil and commercial judgments : lessons for China from US and EU law

Select an Action

Title:

Author:

Huang, Jie, author.

ISBN:

9781849464345

Personal Author:

Huang, Jie, author.

Publication Information:

Oxford : Hart publishing, 2014.

Physical Description:

xviii, 333 pages ; 24 cm.

Series:

Studies in private international law ; volume 14

Studies in private international law ; volume 14.

General Note:

Based on the author's thesis (S.J.D.)--Duke University, School of Law.

Contents:

1.Introduction -- A.Introduction: Theme and Contribution of this Book -- B.Concept of Interregional JRE -- C.A Comparative Perspective -- i.Introduction to the Method: Comparative Studies -- ii.Free Circulation of Judgments in the US -- 1.Historical Backgrounds -- 2.The Full Faith and Credit JRE System -- iii.Free Circulation of Judgments in the EU -- 1.Historical Backgrounds -- 2.The Brussels I Regulation -- iv.Current JRE System in China -- 1.No Overarching Multilateral JRE Scheme and Insufficient Substantive Laws -- 2.JRE Impasse for the Majority of Judgments between Mainland China and Hong Kong -- D.The Need for, and Feasibility of, a Multilateral JRE Arrangement -- i.Need: Economic Integration -- ii.Feasibility -- 1.Geographical, Cultural and Historical Proximities among the Three Regions -- 2.Constitutional Framework Overarching Mainland China, Hong Kong and Macao -- 3.Contributions of the Existing Bilateral Arrangements --

E.Structure of What Follows -- 2.Scholarly Achievements in Chinese Interregional Conflict of Laws -- A.General Theory of Chinese Interregional Conflict of Laws -- i.A Theoretical Postulate -- ii.Feasible Solutions to Interregional Conflicts -- iii.Assessments -- B.Interregional Judgment Recognition and Enforcement -- i.Necessity for Interregional JRE -- ii.Ways of Improving Interregional JRE -- iii.Comments on the Current Two JRE Arrangements -- iv.Assessments -- C.Comparative Studies -- i.Value of Comparative Studies -- ii.Foreign Models for Resolving Interregional Legal Conflicts -- iii.Assessments -- 3.The Existing JRE System among Mainland China, Hong Kong and Macao -- A.Regional JRE Laws -- i.Legal Bases for JRE -- 1.Statute -- a.Mainland China -- b.Macao -- c.Hong Kong -- 2.Common Law -- 3.Insufficient Legal Bases for JRE outside the Mainland--Hong Kong Arrangement -- ii.Requirements for JRE: Legally Effective, Enforceable or Final --

1.Mainland China -- 2.Macao -- 3.Hong Kong -- iii.Grounds for Refusing JRE -- 1.Incompetent Indirect Jurisdiction -- a.Mainland China -- b.Macao -- c.Hong Kong -- 2.Unfair Procedures -- a.Mainland China -- b.Macao -- c.Hong Kong -- 3.Res Judicata -- a.Mainland China -- b.Macao -- c.Hong Kong -- 4.Public Policy Exception -- a.Mainland China -- b.Macao -- c.Hong Kong -- 5.Fraud -- a.Common Law Regime -- b.Statutory Regime -- iv.Problems of Regional JRE Laws -- B.Interregional JRE Laws -- i.Mainland--Hong Kong Arrangement -- 1.Scope of the Arrangement -- a.Choice of Court Agreements -- b.Judgments in Civil and Commercial Cases -- c.Monetary Judgments -- d.Types of Judicial Awards -- e.Levels of Courts -- f.Interregional -- 2.Requirements for JRE -- 3.Grounds for Refusing JRE -- a.Invalid Choice of Court Agreement -- b.Wholly Satisfied Judgment -- c.Exclusive Jurisdiction -- d.Unfair Procedure -- e.Fraud -- f.Res Judicata -- g.Public Policy Exception --

4.Assessment and Conclusion -- ii.The Mainland-Macao Arrangement -- 1.Scope of the Arrangement -- a.Judgments in Civil and Commercial Cases -- b.Monetary and Non-monetary Judgments -- c.Types of Judicial Awards -- d.Levels of Courts -- 2.Requirements for JRE -- 3.Grounds for Refusing JRE -- a.Exclusive Jurisdiction -- b.Res Judicata -- c.Unfair Procedure -- d.Public Policy Exception -- 4.Assessment and Conclusion -- iii.JRE under Multilateral Conventions -- C.The Next Stage: a Multilateral JRE Arrangement -- 4.Three Serious Macro Challenges and their Solutions -- A.Conflicts between Socialist Law and Capitalist Law -- i.Mainland China's Modernization of its Civil and Commercial Law -- 1.Legislation -- a.Contract Law: Endorsing Party Autonomy -- b.Company Law: Equalizing Private and Public Market Players -- c.Property Law: Protecting Private Ownership -- 2.Adjudication -- 3.Conclusion -- ii.Judgments against Mainland Governments --

1.Mainland Public Institutions -- 2.Interregional Public Policy Exception -- B.Conflicts between Civil Law and Common Law -- i.Jurisdiction -- ii.JRE -- C.Weak Mutual Trust -- i.Socialism versus Capitalism -- ii.Differences among Regional Legal Systems -- D.Conclusion -- 5.Selected Rules of the Proposed Multilateral JRE Arrangement -- A.Scope -- i.Civil and Commercial Judgments -- 1.`Civil and Commercial' versus `Administrative' -- 2.Judgments for Personal Consumption Disputes -- 3.Civil Compensation Collateral to Criminal Proceedings -- 4.Judgments for Employment Disputes -- 5.Judgments on Insolvency and Related Issues -- 6.Judgments on Family Law Issues -- 7.Summary -- ii.Levels of Courts -- iii.Types of Judicial Awards -- B.Requirement for JRE: Finality -- i.Different Criteria of `Finality' in Mainland China and Hong Kong -- 1.Criteria of `Finality' under Mainland JRE Law -- 2.Criteria of `Finality' under Hong Kong JRE Law: Chiyu and its Progeny --

ii.Conflicts brought about by the Different Criteria of Finality -- 1.Problems of Chiyu -- 2.Reasons for Chiyu -- 3.Malicious Re-Litigations and Forum Shopping Caused by the Chiyu Doctrine -- 4.The Preferable Minority Approach in Hong Kong Courts -- iii.Proposed Solutions to the Finality Dispute -- 1.Amend Hong Kong Law -- 2.Amend the Mainland CPL -- 3.Interregional Law Approaches -- a.Provide an Autonomous Terminology for Finality -- b.Apply the Law of the Judgment-Rendering Region -- iv.Conclusion -- C.Grounds for Refusing JRE -- i.Incompetent Indirect Jurisdiction -- 1.Direct and Indirect Jurisdiction -- a.JRE Difficulties brought about by Different Regional Direct and Indirect Jurisdiction Laws -- b.Single Enforcement Arrangement -- c.Three Categories of Indirect Jurisdiction -- 2.Required Indirect Jurisdiction -- a.The Defendant has His or Her Domicile or Habitual Residence in the Region where the Judgment-Rendering Court is Located --

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 -- c.Jurisdiction based on a Choice of Court Agreement -- d.Jurisdiction based on Submission -- 3.Excluded Indirect Jurisdiction -- a.Exclusive Jurisdiction over Certain Disputes of Joint Ventures -- b.Jurisdiction of the Place where the Contract is Signed -- c.Jurisdiction by Service on a Defendant Who Temporarily Appears -- 4.Permitted Indirect Jurisdiction -- ii.Unfair Procedure -- 1.Three Instances -- 2.Losing Party or Defendant -- 3.Obligation of Challenging a Judgment on the Ground of Unfair Procedure in the Judgment-rendering Court -- 4.Conclusion -- iii.Res judicata -- 1.Conflicts between a Requested Judgment and a Recognized Judgment -- 2.Conflicts between a Requested Judgment and a Local Judgment -- 3.Same Cause of Action -- 4.Same Parties -- 5.Conclusion -- iv.Fraud -- 1.Autonomous Terminology --

2.Review of Fraud in F2 -- v.Public Policy Exception -- 1.Necessity of Preserving a Public Policy Exception -- 2.Substantive and Procedural Public Policy Exception -- iv.Exhaustive List -- D.Summary -- 6.Implementation of the Proposed Multilateral JRE Arrangement -- A.Legal Form -- i.Amending the PRC Constitution -- ii.Enacting a National JRE Law -- iii.Proposing Model Laws -- iv.Adopting Interregional Arrangement plus Separate Regional Legislation -- B.Coordination Mechanism for Implementing the Proposed Multilateral JRE Arrangement -- i.Exchanging Information about the Specific Judgments that are to be Enforced -- ii.Maintaining Interpretational Uniformity -- iii.Proposed Coordination Organization -- C.Relationship with Other Interregional and International JRE Instruments -- 7.Conclusion.

Abstract:

"This extensive comparative study of the three most important judgment recognition and enforcement (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"--Jacket.

Subject Term:

Judicial process -- China.

Judicial process -- United States.

Judicial process -- European Union countries.

Judicial assistance -- China.

Judicial assistance -- United States.

Judicial assistance -- European Union countries.

Electronic Access:

Inhaltsverzeichnis
Klappentext

Copies:

Available:*

Library	Material Type	Item Barcode	Shelf Number	Copy	Status
Searching... 1:IIEMSA	1:GEN-BOOK	33168025777646	R880 H874.I 2014	1	Searching... Unknown

Bound With These Titles

On Order

Summary

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 China...Her 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.