The Hague Judgments Convention and Mainland China-Hong Kong SAR Judgments Arrangement: Comparison and Prospects for Implementation

IF 1.3 4区 社会学 Q2 INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS
Wenliang Zhang, G. Tu
{"title":"The Hague Judgments Convention and Mainland China-Hong Kong SAR Judgments Arrangement: Comparison and Prospects for Implementation","authors":"Wenliang Zhang, G. Tu","doi":"10.1093/CHINESEJIL/JMAB009","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n The year 2019 saw the arrival of the Hague Judgments Convention and Mainland China-Hong Kong SAR Judgments Arrangement, which is not a coincidence. Both instruments mark a historical culmination and constitute a milestone, at the global level and the at the level of territorial units within a country respectively. With novelties created to avoid the failures shadowing the past Hague Judgments Project, the 2019 Convention reflects the global trend and maximizes the common grounds countries could agree to, though it still falls short of some longstanding expectations. Similarly, the 2019 Arrangement advances judgment circulation between territorial units within China despite that room for further collaboration is still large. In significant respects, the 2019 Arrangement is heavily modelled on the 2019 Convention, while the Arrangement also addresses special concerns of the two regions. Undeniably, it may be another success for the Convention to be able to influence judgments recognition instruments targeting territorial units within a country and show its model effect. Recent years have witnessed Mainland China’s efforts to promote transboundary movement of judgments and its contribution to the arrival of both the 2019 Convention and Arrangement. As an important global player with increasing ambition of claiming more international presence, China will welcome both instruments and the instruments are expected to fare well as desired.","PeriodicalId":45438,"journal":{"name":"Chinese Journal of International Law","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2021-06-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Chinese Journal of International Law","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/CHINESEJIL/JMAB009","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The year 2019 saw the arrival of the Hague Judgments Convention and Mainland China-Hong Kong SAR Judgments Arrangement, which is not a coincidence. Both instruments mark a historical culmination and constitute a milestone, at the global level and the at the level of territorial units within a country respectively. With novelties created to avoid the failures shadowing the past Hague Judgments Project, the 2019 Convention reflects the global trend and maximizes the common grounds countries could agree to, though it still falls short of some longstanding expectations. Similarly, the 2019 Arrangement advances judgment circulation between territorial units within China despite that room for further collaboration is still large. In significant respects, the 2019 Arrangement is heavily modelled on the 2019 Convention, while the Arrangement also addresses special concerns of the two regions. Undeniably, it may be another success for the Convention to be able to influence judgments recognition instruments targeting territorial units within a country and show its model effect. Recent years have witnessed Mainland China’s efforts to promote transboundary movement of judgments and its contribution to the arrival of both the 2019 Convention and Arrangement. As an important global player with increasing ambition of claiming more international presence, China will welcome both instruments and the instruments are expected to fare well as desired.
《海牙裁判文书公约》与《中国内地-香港特别行政区裁判文书安排》:比较与实施展望
2019年,《海牙裁判文书公约》和《内地与香港特别行政区裁判文书安排》相继出台,这并非巧合。这两项文书分别在全球一级和在一个国家的领土单位一级标志着历史的高潮和一个里程碑。2019年的《公约》为避免过去《海牙判决项目》的失败而创造了一些新奇之处,反映了全球趋势,并最大限度地扩大了各国可能达成的共识,尽管它仍未达到一些长期以来的期望。同样,2019年的《安排》促进了中国境内领土单位之间的判决流通,尽管进一步合作的空间仍然很大。2019年《安排》在很大程度上模仿了2019年《公约》,同时也解决了两个地区的特殊关切。不可否认,《公约》能够影响针对一国境内领土单位的判决、承认文书并显示其示范效应,可能是另一项成功。近年来,中国大陆积极推动判决的跨境流动,为《公约》和《安排》的出台做出了积极贡献。作为一个重要的全球参与者,中国将欢迎这两种工具,而这些工具也有望取得预期的良好效果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
20.00%
发文量
25
期刊介绍: The Chinese Journal of International Law is the leading forum for articles on international law by Chinese scholars and on international law issues relating to China. An independent, peer-reviewed research journal edited primarily by scholars from mainland China, and published in association with the Chinese Society of International Law, Beijing, and Wuhan University Institute of International Law, Wuhan, the Journal is a general international law journal with a focus on materials and viewpoints from and/or about China, other parts of Asia, and the broader developing world.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信