|
Hebei Ore Import & Export Co. v. Orient Overseas Container Line Ltd. Hong Kong Chinese law The judgments didn’t explain application of Chinese law.
Round-the-World (U.S.A.) Corp. v. Weihai Textile and Dress Import & Export Co. America Chinese law The principle of the most significant relationship.
Ningbo Dunhuang Import & Export Co. Ltd. v. Dampskibsselskabet af 1912, Aktieselskab and Dampskibsselskabet Aktieselskabet Svendborg Danmark Chinese law The judgments didn’t explain application of Chinese law.
Asil Gida Kimya Sanayi Ve Ticaret A.S. v. Hebei Oil (Group) Co. Turkey Chinese law In the final judgment, the Court applied Chinese law selected by the parties presumptively despite the provision of B/L selecting other laws.
Nanning Tin Food Factory v. Guangzhou Division of Hua’ou Liner and Chinese General Shipping Co. Parties are all Chinese Chinese law The principle of party autonomy.
Zhejiang Orient Science Apparatus Import & Export Co. v. Zim Israel Navigation Co. Ltd. and Ningpo Beilun Container Co. Israel Chinese law The parties modified application of law and selected Chinese law.
Yicheng Shipping Inc. and Yicheng (Tianjin) International Trade Co. Ltd., v. Hebei Huaye Import & Export Co. Ltd. Australia Chinese law (International Administrative Rules on Ship Agency is taken into account) The judgments didn’t explain application of Chinese law.
Zhongyi Furniture Import & Export Co. v. Habag-Lloyd Container Liner Germany Chinese law The judgments didn’t explain application of Chinese law.
USA Fortune Universal Inc. v. Dalian Jihang Ship Agency Co. Ltd. America Chinese law The principle of the most significant relationship.
Japan Fanye Shipping v. Jiangsu Suhao International (Group) Co. Ltd. Japan Chinese law The principle of the most significant relationship.
Tianjin Zhongyuan International Shipping Inc. v. Hong Kong Meitong Ship-Affair Co. and Tianjin Meitong International Shipping Inc. Hong Kong Chinese law The judgments didn’t explain application of Chinese law.
Germany Victory Shipping Co. v. Junye (Tianjin) International Trade Ltd. Germany Chinese law The principle of autonomy of the parties.
Torts Vinmar International Ltd. v. Zhejiang Foreign Exploitation Corp. America Chinese law The judgment applied to the conflict the rule of lex loci dilicti.
Jiangyin Huxing Dress-made Co. Ltd. v. E. Sheer Industries Inc. Hong Kong Shiwei Shipping Corp. Guangdong Textile Import & Export Co. and Zhonghaimao Economic and Trade Exploitation Co. America & Hong Kong Chinese law The judgments didn’t explain application of Chinese law.
Zhongyi Personage Art Import & Export Corp. v. Hong Kong Hengli (Group) Ltd. Hong Kong Chinese law The judgments didn’t explain application of Chinese law.
Korea Kerong Commercial Co. Ltd. v. Fangchenggang Division of Chinese National Administrative Bureau of Foreign Exchange Korea Chinese law The judgments didn’t explain application of Chinese law.
Lujiang v. USA United Airline Co. America Huasha Convention for Uniform Rules on International Air Shipping The principle of autonomy of the parties.
Intellec-tual Property Korea Olympic Industry Co. Ltd. v. Beijing Olympic Hot-energy Equipment Exploitation Co. Ltd. Korea Chinese law The judgments didn’t explain application of Chinese law.
USA Dubang Inc. v. Beijing National Internet Message Co. Ltd. America Chinese law and Paris Convention for the Protection of Industrial Property The judgments didn’t explain application of Chinese law.
Unjust Enrichment Hainan Huaqiao Investment Ltd. etc. v. Qihui International Investment (Hong Kong) Co. Ltd., etc. Hong Kong Chinese law The principle of the most significant relationship.
Employ-ment Silchenko Pavel v. Gemarfin S.A. and Castelli Holding Inc. Russia, Switzerland & Panama Chinese law The principle of the most significant relationship.
Shukyurov Shukyur v. Gemarfin S.A. and Castelli Holding Inc. Ukraine, Switzertland & Panama Chinese law The principle of the most significant relationship.
Loan & Invest-ment Wang Yongyong and Li Xingzhong v. Huang Zhaoming, Lin Chuxiang and Huang Hezheng Hong Kong Chinese law In the 3rd judgment, the Court applied different laws to different legal relationships.
Hunan Huatian Aluminum Industry Ltd. v. Hong Kong Yuzhenzheng Investment Inc., etc. Hong Kong Chinese law The judgments didn’t explain application of Chinese law.
Suibao Group (Shenzhen) Co. v. Shenzhen City Construction & Development (Group) Co. and Suibao Group Ltd. Hong Kong Chinese law The Principle of the most significant relationship.
Wufenghang (Controlling) Co. Ltd. v. Yutai Bank of Construction and Rencheng Bank of Construction Hong Kong Chinese law The judgments didn’t explain application of Chinese law.
Zhuhai Yufen Premise Industry v. Guangdong Branch of China Bank and Guanman Development Ltd. Hong Kong Chinese law The judgments didn’t explain application of Chinese law.
Jurisdic-tion Chinese International Steel Investment Inc. v. Shanghai Branch of the 1st Quanye Bank, etc. Japan Chinese Civil Procedure Law Non-exclusivity of jurisdiction (the domicile of defendant is located in China.)
Jiangdu Ship-Making Factory v. Yangzhou Branch of Chinese Industry & commercial Bank and Hong Kong Branch of China Bank Hong Kong Chinese Civil Procedure Law Territorial jurisdiction (the place of performance of contract is located in China.)
Hong Kong Ruinan Ltd. v. Shanxi New and Big Steel Co. Ltd. Hong Kong Chinese Civil Procedure Law The provision of jurisdiction shuts out the provision of arbitration.
Table 2: Legal Relationship
Category Total Rate
International Trade Contracts 9 18%
Admiralty 6 12%
Maritime 17 34%
Torts and Unjust Enrichment 6 12%
Intellectual Property 2 4%
Employment 2 4%
Loan and Investment 5 10%
Jurisdiction 3 6%
Table 3: Application of Law
|
