scholarly journals On the Jurisdiction of Foreign Divorce Cases in China

2021 ◽  
Vol 6 (5) ◽  
pp. 38
Author(s):  
Xueer Han ◽  
Hanyue Xue ◽  
Yiou Chen ◽  
Xuelin Liu ◽  
Yitao Liu
Keyword(s):  
General Solution ◽  
Civil Procedure ◽  
Entry Point ◽  
Solution Path ◽  
Exclusive Jurisdiction ◽  
Territorial Jurisdiction ◽  
Personal Jurisdiction ◽  
Judicial Interpretations

This article takes China’s jurisdiction over foreign-related divorce cases as an entry point, and systematically expounds the provisions of China’s foreign-related divorce jurisdiction. According to my country’s regulations, my country’s jurisdiction over a foreign-related divorce is vertically divided into direct jurisdiction and indirect jurisdiction, and horizontally divided into personal Jurisdiction, territorial jurisdiction, exclusive jurisdiction, and jurisdiction by agreement. In my country’s Civil Procedure Law and related judicial interpretations, the domicile of the “plaintiff is the defendant” and the location of the plaintiff under certain circumstances is the main focus. The general solution path of the case; At the same time, my country's regulations on foreign-related divorce cases still have shortcomings, and there are still many areas that need to be improved. This article analyzes the shortcomings and the areas to be improved.

scholarly journals GENERAL PRINCIPLES OF CIVIL JURISDICTION

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (86) ◽  
Author(s):  
Nataliia Ryzhenko ◽  
◽  
Olena Korolova ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Civil Procedure ◽  
Judicial System ◽  
Unified Approach ◽  
Administrative Procedure ◽  
Procedural Law ◽  
Territorial Jurisdiction ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
Procedural Code ◽  
The Moment ◽  
Definition Of

From the moment of becoming valid the law of Ukraine «On amendments to the Commercial procedural code of Ukraine, Civil procedural code of Ukraine the Code of administrative procedure of Ukraine and other legislative acts» of 3 October 2017 jurisdiction of courts courts is defined through the concept of «jurisdiction». This article considers the practical and theoretical significance of the amendments made by this legislative act to the current Civil Procedure Code of Ukraine. The significance of civil jurisdiction and its classification are revealed. To date, the science of civil procedural law has not developed a unified approach to the definition of «jurisdiction» and «civil jurisdiction». With regard to substantive and subjective jurisdiction, it is emphasized that these aspects should be taken into account together. Territorial jurisdiction is defined in the Civil Procedure Code of Ukraine as jurisdiction. The instance jurisdiction determines the scope of powers of the court of each link of the judicial system of Ukraine, and the territorial (jurisdiction) determines the limits of powers between courts within one judicial link to hear cases in the first instance. In general, the rules of territorial jurisdiction are less strict than the rules of substantive jurisdiction, as the level of the court is considered appropriate, but violations of the rules of territorial jurisdiction may create additional inconveniences, which, however, usually do not objectively affect the content of the decision. The difficulty of establishing the jurisdiction of the court at this stage of updating the judicial system of Ukraine is due to significant changes in procedural law. The process of harmonization of procedural legislation has contributed to the consolidation of a single conceptual apparatus, which has so far been used mostly at the theoretical level. Thus, at the legislative level, the jurisdiction of the courts of Ukraine is determined exclusively by the jurisdiction, which in the Civil Procedure Code of Ukraine, the Commercial Procedure Code of Ukraine and the Code of Administrative Procedure of Ukraine is divided into substantive and subjective, instance, territorial. However, the analyzed provisions of the Civil Procedure Code of Ukraine demonstrate the need to further improve the rules of civil jurisdiction.

Old wine in a new bottle? Assessing the injunction remedy for intellectual property disputes in China

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. 295-313
Author(s):  
Peicheng Wu ◽  
Charlie Xiao-chuan Weng
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Civil Law ◽  
Civil Procedure ◽  
Injunctive Relief ◽  
The Us ◽  
Intellectual Property Infringement ◽  
Judicial Interpretations

The landmark eBay case in the US has noticeably influenced Chinese judicial practices concerning intellectual property injunctions. The injunctive relief in intellectual property infringement cases in China has witnessed a change from a traditional automatic-granting approach to a more equitable approach. However, there are still some issues, namely: the standards of awarding injunctive relief in intellectual property cases are unclear; the civil law tradition and procedure can create issues when applying for injunctions; and the scope of the injunction could be disproportionate in certain cases. In order to address these concerns, China needs to publish judicial interpretations to clarify that the eBay test can be applied to both preliminary injunctions and permanent injunctions. China should further polish up its civil procedure legislation to enable a permanent injunction to be effective immediately, even at the first instance, and to allow the parties to an intellectual property contract to have agreements on conditions of applying for injunctive relief. Additionally, Chinese courts should adopt a proportionate method in determining cases regarding intellectual property injunctions.

Aerial Jurisdiction

1911 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 171-180
Author(s):  
George Grafton Wilson
Keyword(s):  
Public Policy ◽  
The State ◽  
Legal Concept ◽  
Exclusive Jurisdiction ◽  
Territorial Jurisdiction ◽  
Open Sea ◽  
Marginal Sea ◽  
General Proposition ◽  
State Authority ◽  
The Right

As a legal concept jurisdiction may be considered the right to exercise state authority. Story says that it may be “laid down as a general proposition that all persons and property within the territorial jurisdiction of a sovereign are amenable to the jurisdiction of himself or his courts; and that the exceptions to this rule are such only as by common usage and public policy have been allowed, in order to preserve the peace and harmony of nations, and to regulate their intercourse in a manner best suited to their dignity and rights.” (Santissima Trinidad 7 Wheat. 354) It is fully recognized that all land and the marginal sea, to a distance of a marine league at least, is subject to territorial jurisdiction and that the open sea is not within the jurisdiction of any state though vessels sailing upon such seas are within the jurisdiction of the state whose flag they rightfully fly. As Story says exceptions to this rule of exclusive jurisdiction are such “as by common usage and public policy have been allowed, in order to preserve the peace and harmony of nations, and to regulate their intercourse, in a manner best suited to their dignity and rights.”

EFFECTIVENESS OF EXCLUSIVE JURISDICTION CLAUSES IN THE CHINESE COURTS—A PRAGMATIC STUDY

2012 ◽  
Vol 61 (2) ◽  
pp. 459-484 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zheng Sophia Tang
Keyword(s):  
Prima Facie ◽  
Civil Procedure ◽  
Status Quo ◽  
Specific Context ◽  
Party Autonomy ◽  
Exclusive Jurisdiction ◽  
Chinese Law ◽  
Narrow Scope ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
Recognition And Enforcement

AbstractChinese judicial practice demonstrates great diversity in enforcing exclusive jurisdiction clauses. In practice, the derogation effect of a valid foreign jurisdiction clause is frequently ignored by some Chinese courts. It may be argued that these Chinese courts fail to respect party autonomy and international comity. However, a close scrutiny shows that the effectiveness of an exclusive jurisdiction clause has close connections with the recognition and enforcement of judgments. If the judgment of the chosen court cannot be recognized and enforced in the request court by any means, the request court may take jurisdiction in breach of the jurisdiction clause in order to achieve justice. Chinese judicial practice demonstrates the inevitable influence of the narrow scope of the Chinese law in recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments. It is submitted that the Chinese courts do not zealously guard Chinese jurisdiction, or deliberately ignore party autonomy and international comity. Instead, the Chinese courts have considered the possibility of enforcement of judgments and the goal of justice. Applying the prima facie unreasonable decision test is the best the courts can do in the specific context of the Chinese law. The status quo cannot be improved simply by reforming Chinese jurisdiction rules in choice of court agreements. A comprehensive improvement of civil procedure law in both jurisdiction rules and recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments is needed.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document