处理飞机融资中的注册和管辖权问题

IF 0.2 Q4 LAW
Attila Sipos
{"title":"处理飞机融资中的注册和管辖权问题","authors":"Attila Sipos","doi":"10.1093/ulr/unae025","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In aircraft financing, dealing with jurisdiction and applicable law is of paramount importance. Given the global nature of the aviation industry, the parties involved in aircraft-financing transactions must carefully consider the jurisdiction in which disputes may arise as well as the relevant laws that govern such disputes. In aircraft financing, there are a great number of jurisdictions that may be selected by the parties. The existing international treaties in aircraft financing, such as the 1948 Geneva Convention and the 2001 Cape Town Convention with its Aircraft Equipment Protocol, unified international law considerably. Nevertheless, these treaties have not resulted in the elimination of the conflict of laws, and the choice of law in the agreements has limited effect. Despite the registration obligations of aircraft being unified enough due to the rigorous requirements of the 1944 Chicago Convention and its Annexes, further unification is necessary to manage the conflicts of laws. Such uniformity is still awaited, although the Cape Town Convention and its Aircraft Equipment Protocol provide a standardized legal regime for aircraft financing, transactions, and registrations. These international instruments and the registration requirement therein (International Registry) help establish uniformity and clarity in the rights and priorities of the parties involved. This article introduces the complexity of these areas of the aviation industry and focuses on the jurisdictional challenges regarding registration and contractual relations.","PeriodicalId":42756,"journal":{"name":"Uniform Law Review","volume":"40 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Dealing with registrations and jurisdiction in aircraft financing\",\"authors\":\"Attila Sipos\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/ulr/unae025\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In aircraft financing, dealing with jurisdiction and applicable law is of paramount importance. Given the global nature of the aviation industry, the parties involved in aircraft-financing transactions must carefully consider the jurisdiction in which disputes may arise as well as the relevant laws that govern such disputes. In aircraft financing, there are a great number of jurisdictions that may be selected by the parties. The existing international treaties in aircraft financing, such as the 1948 Geneva Convention and the 2001 Cape Town Convention with its Aircraft Equipment Protocol, unified international law considerably. Nevertheless, these treaties have not resulted in the elimination of the conflict of laws, and the choice of law in the agreements has limited effect. Despite the registration obligations of aircraft being unified enough due to the rigorous requirements of the 1944 Chicago Convention and its Annexes, further unification is necessary to manage the conflicts of laws. Such uniformity is still awaited, although the Cape Town Convention and its Aircraft Equipment Protocol provide a standardized legal regime for aircraft financing, transactions, and registrations. These international instruments and the registration requirement therein (International Registry) help establish uniformity and clarity in the rights and priorities of the parties involved. This article introduces the complexity of these areas of the aviation industry and focuses on the jurisdictional challenges regarding registration and contractual relations.\",\"PeriodicalId\":42756,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Uniform Law Review\",\"volume\":\"40 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-12\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Uniform Law Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/ulr/unae025\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Uniform Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/ulr/unae025","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在飞机融资中,处理管辖权和适用法律至关重要。鉴于航空业的全球性质,参与飞机融资交易的各方必须仔细考虑可能发生争议的司法管辖区以及管辖此类争议的相关法律。在飞机融资方面,当事人可选择的司法管辖区非常多。飞机融资方面的现有国际条约,如 1948 年《日内瓦公约》和 2001 年《开普敦公约》及其《航空器设备议定书》,在很大程度上统一了国际法。然而,这些条约并未消除法律冲突,协议中的法律选择效力有限。尽管由于 1944 年《芝加哥公约》及其附件的严格要求,航空器的注册义务已经足够统一,但仍有必要进一步统一,以管理法律冲突。尽管《开普敦公约》及其《航空器设备议定书》为航空器融资、交易和注册提供了标准化的法律制度,但这种统一性仍有待实现。这些国际文书及其中的登记要求(国际登记处)有助于在有关各方的权利和优先权方面建立统一性和明确性。本文介绍了航空业这些领域的复杂性,并重点讨论了有关注册和合同关系的司法挑战。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Dealing with registrations and jurisdiction in aircraft financing
In aircraft financing, dealing with jurisdiction and applicable law is of paramount importance. Given the global nature of the aviation industry, the parties involved in aircraft-financing transactions must carefully consider the jurisdiction in which disputes may arise as well as the relevant laws that govern such disputes. In aircraft financing, there are a great number of jurisdictions that may be selected by the parties. The existing international treaties in aircraft financing, such as the 1948 Geneva Convention and the 2001 Cape Town Convention with its Aircraft Equipment Protocol, unified international law considerably. Nevertheless, these treaties have not resulted in the elimination of the conflict of laws, and the choice of law in the agreements has limited effect. Despite the registration obligations of aircraft being unified enough due to the rigorous requirements of the 1944 Chicago Convention and its Annexes, further unification is necessary to manage the conflicts of laws. Such uniformity is still awaited, although the Cape Town Convention and its Aircraft Equipment Protocol provide a standardized legal regime for aircraft financing, transactions, and registrations. These international instruments and the registration requirement therein (International Registry) help establish uniformity and clarity in the rights and priorities of the parties involved. This article introduces the complexity of these areas of the aviation industry and focuses on the jurisdictional challenges regarding registration and contractual relations.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
24
×
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