Transboundary recognition and enforcement of judgments is of increasing practical significance and it draws a great deal of efforts at various levels. However, the efforts already made are predominantly in relation to...Transboundary recognition and enforcement of judgments is of increasing practical significance and it draws a great deal of efforts at various levels. However, the efforts already made are predominantly in relation to cross-border movement of monetary judgments, leaving non-monetary judgments beyond recognizability. Investigation into China＇s legislation and adjudication reveals that there is no distinction made between recognition of monetary and non-monetary judgments, and practice also ignores such a distinction. Following the trend of embracing non-monetary judgments within the scope of recognizablility, China＇s standpoint seemingly appears to be desirable, although the long-standing non-differentiation of monetary and non-monetary judgments is not presumed to be originally out of promoting recognition and enforcement of foreign non-monetary judgments in China. It is submitted that for promoting recognition and enforcement of foreign non-monetary judgments, China shall introduce independent rules in order to facilitate the circulation of such judgments, which merits a special treatment. For parties to seek the recognition and enforcement of such judgments, prior to any overhauling of the current legal regime, they have to follow China＇s persisting general legal regime and judicial practice regarding recognition and enforcement of all categories of foreign judgments, and a special call is made for particular attention to the reciprocity requirement and due service requirement.展开更多
通过评述英国上诉法院作出的"Dallah Real Estate and Tourism Holding Company v.The Ministry of Religious Affairs,Government of Pakistan"判例,分析英国法院在承认与执行外国仲裁裁决时的自由裁量权行使之条件,并提出...通过评述英国上诉法院作出的"Dallah Real Estate and Tourism Holding Company v.The Ministry of Religious Affairs,Government of Pakistan"判例,分析英国法院在承认与执行外国仲裁裁决时的自由裁量权行使之条件,并提出该判例可为《承认及执行外国仲裁裁决公约》缔约国提供参考。展开更多
This article discusses the rules for recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments in the Republic of Korea （hereinafter referred to as ＂South Korea＂ or ＂Korea＂）. Articles 217 and 217-2 of the Civil Procedure...This article discusses the rules for recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments in the Republic of Korea （hereinafter referred to as ＂South Korea＂ or ＂Korea＂）. Articles 217 and 217-2 of the Civil Procedure Act of Korea and Articles 26 and 27 of the Civil Enforcement Act of Korea provide for the recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments respectively. Korea has not entered into any bilateral or multilateral treaties regarding the recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments and is not a party to the Convention on Choice of Court Agreements. The article also considers the current undesirable status of recognition and enforcement of judgments in the region consisting of China, Japan and South Korea （hereinafter referred to as ＂Region＂） and suggests a course of action to be taken to improve the situation. The author believes that the experts of the Region should embark upon a project to improve the current situation and that the first step should be to exchange and gather information on the current legal regime of the countries in the Region on the recognition and enforcement of judgments. The author looks forward to future cooperation among the experts in the Region on this topic and is confident that the reciprocity requirement, which currently is a major obstacle to the mutual recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments in the Region, will be overcome in the near future.展开更多
In the era of globalization,commercial transactions readily gain international dimensions and are increasingly delocalized.With a view to establishing effective dispute resolution mechanisms,it is desirable that judgm...In the era of globalization,commercial transactions readily gain international dimensions and are increasingly delocalized.With a view to establishing effective dispute resolution mechanisms,it is desirable that judgments rendered in one state be recognized and enforced in other states.This is especially important in East Asia,as cross-border business activities are rapidly expanding along with its economic growth.This paper aims to examine the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters in East Asia with a focus on Sino-Japanese relationships,where the establishment of a reciprocal relationship has posed a considerable challenge.It is worth considering how we can gradually pave the way towards the mutual recognition and enforcement of judgments to achieve coordination among legal systems.展开更多
In December 2016, the Nanjing Intermediate People＇s Court in China issued its ruling in the Kolmar vo Sutex case, where a monetary judgment from Singapore was recognized and enforced against a local textile company. ...In December 2016, the Nanjing Intermediate People＇s Court in China issued its ruling in the Kolmar vo Sutex case, where a monetary judgment from Singapore was recognized and enforced against a local textile company. The case confirms that once a foreign country has taken the initiative, Chinese courts will follow up to enforce judgments from that country reciprocally. This is the doctrine of de facto reciprocity adopted by some Chinese courts. The paper surveys the judicial practice of Chinese courts and finds that this area of law is full of confusion and uncertainties due to the lack of applicable rules. Recent developments suggest that China may move away from this approach and adopt a relaxed version of reciprocity, which is worthy of close attention.展开更多
基金This research is supported by National Social Science Foundation of China （Grant No. 15CFX069） and Beijing Social Science Foundation （Grant No. 17FXC031）.
文摘Transboundary recognition and enforcement of judgments is of increasing practical significance and it draws a great deal of efforts at various levels. However, the efforts already made are predominantly in relation to cross-border movement of monetary judgments, leaving non-monetary judgments beyond recognizability. Investigation into China＇s legislation and adjudication reveals that there is no distinction made between recognition of monetary and non-monetary judgments, and practice also ignores such a distinction. Following the trend of embracing non-monetary judgments within the scope of recognizablility, China＇s standpoint seemingly appears to be desirable, although the long-standing non-differentiation of monetary and non-monetary judgments is not presumed to be originally out of promoting recognition and enforcement of foreign non-monetary judgments in China. It is submitted that for promoting recognition and enforcement of foreign non-monetary judgments, China shall introduce independent rules in order to facilitate the circulation of such judgments, which merits a special treatment. For parties to seek the recognition and enforcement of such judgments, prior to any overhauling of the current legal regime, they have to follow China＇s persisting general legal regime and judicial practice regarding recognition and enforcement of all categories of foreign judgments, and a special call is made for particular attention to the reciprocity requirement and due service requirement.
文摘通过评述英国上诉法院作出的"Dallah Real Estate and Tourism Holding Company v.The Ministry of Religious Affairs,Government of Pakistan"判例,分析英国法院在承认与执行外国仲裁裁决时的自由裁量权行使之条件,并提出该判例可为《承认及执行外国仲裁裁决公约》缔约国提供参考。
文摘This article discusses the rules for recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments in the Republic of Korea （hereinafter referred to as ＂South Korea＂ or ＂Korea＂）. Articles 217 and 217-2 of the Civil Procedure Act of Korea and Articles 26 and 27 of the Civil Enforcement Act of Korea provide for the recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments respectively. Korea has not entered into any bilateral or multilateral treaties regarding the recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments and is not a party to the Convention on Choice of Court Agreements. The article also considers the current undesirable status of recognition and enforcement of judgments in the region consisting of China, Japan and South Korea （hereinafter referred to as ＂Region＂） and suggests a course of action to be taken to improve the situation. The author believes that the experts of the Region should embark upon a project to improve the current situation and that the first step should be to exchange and gather information on the current legal regime of the countries in the Region on the recognition and enforcement of judgments. The author looks forward to future cooperation among the experts in the Region on this topic and is confident that the reciprocity requirement, which currently is a major obstacle to the mutual recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments in the Region, will be overcome in the near future.
文摘In the era of globalization,commercial transactions readily gain international dimensions and are increasingly delocalized.With a view to establishing effective dispute resolution mechanisms,it is desirable that judgments rendered in one state be recognized and enforced in other states.This is especially important in East Asia,as cross-border business activities are rapidly expanding along with its economic growth.This paper aims to examine the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters in East Asia with a focus on Sino-Japanese relationships,where the establishment of a reciprocal relationship has posed a considerable challenge.It is worth considering how we can gradually pave the way towards the mutual recognition and enforcement of judgments to achieve coordination among legal systems.
文摘In December 2016, the Nanjing Intermediate People＇s Court in China issued its ruling in the Kolmar vo Sutex case, where a monetary judgment from Singapore was recognized and enforced against a local textile company. The case confirms that once a foreign country has taken the initiative, Chinese courts will follow up to enforce judgments from that country reciprocally. This is the doctrine of de facto reciprocity adopted by some Chinese courts. The paper surveys the judicial practice of Chinese courts and finds that this area of law is full of confusion and uncertainties due to the lack of applicable rules. Recent developments suggest that China may move away from this approach and adopt a relaxed version of reciprocity, which is worthy of close attention.
