Cross-strait Four Regions in Greater China belong to different jurisdictions. In the process of judicial settlement of private lew disputes between the four jurisdictions, there are legal difficulties in jurisdiction,...Cross-strait Four Regions in Greater China belong to different jurisdictions. In the process of judicial settlement of private lew disputes between the four jurisdictions, there are legal difficulties in jurisdiction, application of law and the recognition and enforcement of court decisions. Although the internal laws of the four jurisdictions and the cross- jurisdictional bilateral agreements provide rules for the settlement of these conflicts of laws, there are no systematic and comprehensive provisions in the four jurisdictions. In other words, neither the existing unilateral rules in the four jurisdictions nor resolving inter-regional private law conflicts by reference to the rules of 'private international law could reflect the particularity of Chinas inter-regional private law. Behind such dilemma are conflicts of legal interests, since these jurisdictions solely focus on unilateral legal interests when drafting legal rules, or pursue superficial convergence of conflict rules, we cannot fundamentally resolve the dilemma in the judicial settlement of Chinas inter-regional private /mv disputes. In order to get out of the plight in the judicial settlement of inter-regional private law disputes in China, these jurisdictions should take the coordination of legal interests as the starting point and purpose, from soliloquy to negotiation, from independence to equal respect and communication, establishing a good communication mechanism among jurisdictions, courts, legislators and the parties concerned.展开更多
基金sponsored by the Macao Foundation Research Project,entitled Cross-regional Legal Coordination and Cooperation:A Study Centered on Greater China(Grant No.0323)
文摘Cross-strait Four Regions in Greater China belong to different jurisdictions. In the process of judicial settlement of private lew disputes between the four jurisdictions, there are legal difficulties in jurisdiction, application of law and the recognition and enforcement of court decisions. Although the internal laws of the four jurisdictions and the cross- jurisdictional bilateral agreements provide rules for the settlement of these conflicts of laws, there are no systematic and comprehensive provisions in the four jurisdictions. In other words, neither the existing unilateral rules in the four jurisdictions nor resolving inter-regional private law conflicts by reference to the rules of 'private international law could reflect the particularity of Chinas inter-regional private law. Behind such dilemma are conflicts of legal interests, since these jurisdictions solely focus on unilateral legal interests when drafting legal rules, or pursue superficial convergence of conflict rules, we cannot fundamentally resolve the dilemma in the judicial settlement of Chinas inter-regional private /mv disputes. In order to get out of the plight in the judicial settlement of inter-regional private law disputes in China, these jurisdictions should take the coordination of legal interests as the starting point and purpose, from soliloquy to negotiation, from independence to equal respect and communication, establishing a good communication mechanism among jurisdictions, courts, legislators and the parties concerned.
