scholarly journals Demand Guarantees in the People’s Republic of China and the Republic of South Africa

2019 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. 4-32
Author(s):  
Ch. Hugo
Keyword(s):  
South Africa ◽  
People’S Republic Of China ◽  
People's Republic Of China ◽  
Judicial Interpretation ◽  
Republic Of China ◽  
The World ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Republic ◽  
Legal Consequences

Guarantees play an important role in large commercial contracts internationally. Guarantees can be either independent (demand) guarantees or accessory guarantees. The legal consequences of the two differ significantly and, therefore, it is important to differentiate clearly between the two. In the case of independent (demand) guarantees – the focus of this contribution – the guarantor’s liability is independent of the underlying performance it is guaranteeing, and is accordingly to be determined, in principle, with reference only to the terms of the guarantee. However, this is not an absolute principle. Jurisdictions throughout the world recognize exceptions to this principle, the most important and prevalent being fraud on the part of the beneficiary. A Judicial Interpretation by the Supreme People’s Court of the People’s Republic of China relating to independent guarantees came into operation in December 2016. Its rules depart in some important respects from the law of guarantees in South Africa, both in relation to the determination of the nature of the guarantee (as independent or accessory) and in relation to the exceptions to the principle of independence. This article explores these issues against the background of the law of contract of both countries.

CHINA - SOUTH AFRICA: EQUAL PARTNERSHIP OR MIRROR OF NEOCOLONIAL PRC POLICY TRENDS IN AFRICA?

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ksenia Muratshina
Keyword(s):  
South Africa ◽  
People’S Republic Of China ◽  
People's Republic Of China ◽  
Present Stage ◽  
Republic Of China ◽  
The Republic

The article analyzes the main directions of interaction between the People's Republic of China and one of its partners in the BRICS group - the Republic of South Africa - at the present stage. The main areas of interaction, problems and results of cooperation are considered.

The Normalization of Sino-French Diplomatic Relations in 1964 and the Formation of the “One-China” Principle: Negotiations over Breaking French Diplomatic Relations with the Republic of China Government and the Recognition of the People’s Republic of China as the Sole Legitimate Government

2012 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 252-271
Author(s):  
Madoka Fukuda
Keyword(s):  
The United States ◽  
People’S Republic Of China ◽  
Diplomatic Relations ◽  
People's Republic Of China ◽  
African Countries ◽  
Republic Of China ◽  
The Republic Of China ◽  
The Republic ◽  
The Government ◽  
The One

AbstractThis article examines the substance and modification of the “One-China” principle, which the government of the People’s Republic of China (PRC) pursued in the mid 1960s. Under this principle, a country wishing to establish diplomatic relations with the PRC was required first to break off such relations with the Republic of China (ROC). In 1964 the PRC established diplomatic relations with France. This was its first ambassadorial exchange with a Western government. The PRC, in the negotiations over the establishment of diplomatic relations, attempted to achieve some consensus with France on the matter of “One-China”. The PRC, nevertheless, had to abandon these attempts, even though it demanded fewer conditions of France than of the United States (USA), Japan and other Western countries in the 1970s. The PRC had demanded adherence to the “One-China” principle since 1949. France, however, refused to accept this condition. Nevertheless, the PRC established diplomatic relations with France before the latter broke off relations with the ROC. Subsequently, the PRC abandoned the same condition in negotiations with the African governments of the Republic of Congo, Central Africa, Dahomey and Mauritania. After the negotiations with France, the PRC began to insist that the joint communiqué on the establishment of diplomatic relations should clearly state that “the Government of the People’s Republic of China is the sole legal government of China”. However, France refused to insert these words into the communiqué. Afterwards, the PRC nevertheless insisted on putting such a statement into the joint communiqués or exchanges of notes on the establishment of diplomatic relations with the African countries mentioned above. This was done in order to set precedents for making countries accede to the “One-China” principle. The “One-China” principle was, thus, gradually formed in the process of the negotiation and bargaining between the PRC and other governments.

The Law of the People's Republic of China on Safeguarding National Security in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-17
Author(s):  
Simon N.M. Young
Keyword(s):  
Hong Kong ◽  
National Security ◽  
Chief Executive ◽  
People’S Republic Of China ◽  
Special Administrative Region ◽  
People's Republic Of China ◽  
Republic Of China ◽  
Administrative Region ◽  
Basic Law ◽  
The Law

The Law of the People's Republic of China on Safeguarding National Security in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (NSL) was passed on June 30, 2020 by the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress (NPCSC). It did not have immediate direct effect in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (HKSAR). After consulting the Committee for the Basic Law of the HKSAR (BLC) and the Government of the HKSAR (HKSARG), the NPCSC added the NSL to Annex III of The Basic Law of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of the People's Republic of China (Basic Law) before the Chief Executive of the HKSAR (Chief Executive) promulgated the NSL for local application. All this happened on June 30, enabling the NSL to enter into force at 11 p.m., just ahead of the twenty-third anniversary of the establishment of the HKSAR on July 1, 2020.

Problems Related to the Practical Implementation of the Treaty of Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters between the Republic of Bulgaria and People’s Republic of China

De Jure ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Dimitar Mladenov ◽  
Keyword(s):  
People’S Republic Of China ◽  
Practical Implementation ◽  
Legal Assistance ◽  
People's Republic Of China ◽  
Mutual Legal Assistance ◽  
Republic Of China ◽  
Autonomous Regions ◽  
The Republic ◽  
Criminal Matters

The article addresses various problems in the practical implementation of the Treaty on Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters between the Republic of Bulgaria and the People’s Republic of China. These include way of execution, proofs, centralized communication, special autonomous regions of China, political crimes, etc. from a Bulgarian perspective.

scholarly journals What’s the lender liability risk for soil pollution in the People’s Republic of China? An evaluation of China’s new Soil Pollution and Control Law in the light of the USA and UK regimes

2019 ◽  
Vol 21 (3) ◽  
pp. 173-188
Author(s):  
Lloyd Andrew Brown
Keyword(s):  
Soil Pollution ◽  
People’S Republic Of China ◽  
People's Republic Of China ◽  
Republic Of China ◽  
The Usa ◽  
The Law ◽  
Lender Liability ◽  
Management Advice ◽  
And Control ◽  
People's Congress

On 1 January 2019, following a presidential order confirming its adoption by the Fifth Session of the Standing Committee of the 13th National People’s Congress of the People’s Republic of China (PRC), the Law of the People’s Republic of China on Soil Pollution and Control 2019 (SPC) was introduced into law. Succinctly, the SPC was enacted to deal with the vast amount of soil pollution that currently exists in China. This article’s central thesis is that, following a comparative analysis of the regulatory regimes in the USA and UK, the law creates environment-related risks for lenders. In particular, the article is concerned with the risk of lender liability, that is, where the lender itself is made directly liable for the costs of soil pollution remediation. In light of the USA and UK regimes, risk management advice is provided for obviating any prospective lender liability that may be forthcoming from the SPC. As with the regulations in other countries, it appears that the degree of ‘control’ that lenders exercise over their clients must be limited to mitigate the possible transference of any direct liability under the PRC’s principles of property rights law.

scholarly journals Taiwanese Identity – Past Factors and Present Circumstances

2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (2) ◽  
pp. 113-128
Author(s):  
Pawel Sendyka
Keyword(s):  
People’S Republic Of China ◽  
People's Republic Of China ◽  
Republic Of China ◽  
Taiwanese Identity ◽  
The Republic ◽  
The Taiwan Strait ◽  
White Terror ◽  
Nationalist Government ◽  
The Military ◽  
Do So

Abstract Taiwan is an island that off the coast of China. To say that Taiwan is a country is to offend the Communist People’s Republic of China which claims sovereignty over the island and markets it to the world as a “renegade province” which must be re-united with the mainland, by force, if necessary. For people who know very little about Taiwan and its big neighbour across the Taiwan Strait this may even sound convincing, but the truth is more complex. In 1949 the nationalist government (Kuomintang or KMT) having lost the Chinese Civil War retreated from the mainland; the communists have never ruled the island. The settling of the Republic of China’s government in Taiwan and the era of “White Terror” was another one in a series of historical events that were fundamental in forming the modern Taiwanese identity. Whatever the proponents of “one China” claim, the truth of the matter is that there is a shift in attitudes of the inhabitants of Taiwan in how they feel about themselves (Taiwanese, Chinese or both). This is a crucial fact that will have to be acknowledged in the cross-strait relations. The identity argument as such, is independent of any historical claims. And this Taiwanese identity has been evolving and will continue to do so, shaped by the past and the most recent events like the Hong Kong protests, the pandemic, politics and the military aggression and intimidation by the People’s Republic of China. This article will examine these factors in turn.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document