Suchergebnisse

AbstractOn 1 September 2023, the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress amended the Chinese Civil Procedure Law which will come into effect on 1 January 2024 ('the 2024 CPL'). The 2024 CPL brings significant changes to the entire procedure of transnational civil and commercial litigation in China covering jurisdiction, service of process, the taking of evidence abroad, and the recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments. It is critical for foreign states, courts, and parties which conduct business in China to understand this new legal development and to prepare for the changes. Adopting comparative-law and empirical research methods, this commentary aims to explain the new provisions for transnational civil litigation in the 2024 CPL and how they may be implemented in practice.

Abstract
In 2022, China introduced a landmark Data Property Rights System, followed by implementation rules in 2023 and 2024. Concurrently, the EU enacted the groundbreaking Data Act. While both systems oppose granting exclusive data access rights, they differ in their approaches: China establishes new property rights for data processors, while the EU imposes obligations on them. By comparing China's Data Property Rights System with the EU Data Act, this paper aims to elucidate the background, contents, and challenges of the Data Property Rights System in the context of digital trade. It argues that China will address the dilemmas of security risks versus data commercialization by implementing a national negative list for data outflows, qualified by green channels in selected industries. It urges China to adopt a more consistent national approach in implementing Data Intellectual Property Rights, resolve the classification and non-discrimination treatment issues in international trade, and draw lessons from the EU sui generis right. It also suggests that focusing on sharing non-personal data under the China Data Property Right System and the EU Data Act may reshape our understanding of governing non-personal data flows and non-consumer users of data products in Free Trade Agreements.

AbstractThe 1965 Convention on the Service Abroad of Judicial and Extrajudicial Documents in Civil or Commercial Matters has increasingly been used by its member states to demonstrate their territorial claims, including in the Falklands dispute and the Israel-Palestine conflict. This has now arisen in the Russo-Ukrainian war, as conflicting declarations have been formulated by eight states under the Convention. This Essay analyzes the legal dilemmas brought by these declarations and proposes preliminary solutions.

Abstract
Personal data protection in investment arbitration is increasingly important as more and more countries enact mandatory personal data protection laws and the COVID-19 pandemic makes online hearings the new normal. Tribunals have to consider critical, yet unresolved, normative questions, such as (i) how data protection laws would influence the trend towards transparency in investment arbitrations brought pursuant to modern investment treaties; (ii) whether a party can invoke a data protection law to reject access to fundamental documents and completely shift the power in an arbitration proceeding; (iii) whether it is good to have multiple data protection laws directly applicable in an investment arbitration; and (iv) whether the so-called Brussels Effect may take hold of investment arbitration. These questions directly address the alleged legitimacy crisis of investment arbitration (for example, procedural transparency and efficiency) in the digital era. They also have a critical impact on the fairness of proceedings and are closely related to the protection of fundamental human rights and the concern of digital surveillance. This article comprehensively maps the consensual and mandatory applications of data protection laws in investment arbitration. Adopting comparative-law and conflict-of-laws methodologies, it intends to provide tentative solutions to the four questions mentioned above.