首页> 外文OA文献 >Legal Pluralism, Institutionalism, and Judicial Recognition of Hong Kong-China Cross-Border Insolvency Judgments
【2h】

Legal Pluralism, Institutionalism, and Judicial Recognition of Hong Kong-China Cross-Border Insolvency Judgments

机译:中国跨境破产判决的法律多元化,制度主义和司法认定

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

Legal pluralism and institutionalism are important theoretical underpinnings for the discourses of judicial recognition under dual legal systems that coexist within one sovereign nation such as the case of China and Hong Kong. Institutionalism provides that only formal institutions (eg, constitutions, laws and treaties), unlike informal ones (eg, private contracts, traditions and customs), can facilitate judicial recognition and enforcements for insolvency creditor rights protection. Legal pluralism, however, provides for an alternative to circumventing political sovereignty issues typically associated with the making of treaties for mutual judicial recognition purposes. Under the Chinese politico-legal system, Hong Kong is a Special Administrative Region which is akin to a province; as such, Hong Kong is not qualified to sign a bilateral treaty with China. This article expounds and analyses why instituting and implementing a special arrangement (an alternative to a treaty) can help optimise the mutual enforcement of Hong Kong-China cross-border insolvency judgments and orders.
机译:法律多元化和制度主义是在一个主权国家(例如中国和香港)共存的双重法律体系下司法承认话语的重要理论基础。制度主义规定,与非正式机构(例如私人合同,传统和习俗)不同,只有正式机构(例如宪法,法律和条约)可以促进司法承认和执行,以保护破产债权人的权利。然而,法律多元化为规避通常与为相互司法承认目的而订立条约有关的政治主权问题提供了一种替代选择。在中国的政治法律制度下,香港是一个与一个省相似的特别行政区;因此,香港没有资格与中国签署双边条约。本文阐述并分析了为什么建立和实施一项特殊安排(替代条约)可以帮助优化相互促进执行的中国香港跨境破产判决和命令。

著录项

  • 作者

    Lee EH;

  • 作者单位
  • 年度 2015
  • 总页数
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号