| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
165686
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Article 79 of the CISG exempts a party from liability for damages caused by an impediment beyond the party’s control. Article 79(1) specifies the requirements for the exemption and states that the existence of an impediment is prerequisite for the exemption. However, Article 79 does not define “impediment”, nor do any other relevant articles. Although a change of circumstances has been frequently claimed to warrant an exemption, no provision of the CISG clearly states whether a change of circumstances can constitute an impediment to warrant an exemption. Although the exemption under Article 79 is confined to liability for damages, Article 79 is one of the most challenging provisions of the CISG in that it limits the absolute liability doctrine at common law. This paper considers what constitutes an impediment and whether a change of circumstances can constitute an impediment that will warrant an exemption.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
165684
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
As climate change continues to melt Arctic sea-ice, the Northwest Passage will likely see more international cargo shipments in the future. Since China is the world’s largest trading and shipping state, a significant portion of that traffic can be expected to involve Chinese companies. For this reason, it is widely assumed that China will eventually side with the United States in its longstanding dispute with Canada about the legal status of the Northwest Passage and assert that the waterway constitutes an “international strait”. This assumption may prove to be incorrect as China has practical and legally strategic reasons to side with Canada, especially because of similarities between the Northwest Passage and the Qiongzhou Strait. This article thus suggests it may be mutually beneficial for both Canada and China to recognize each other’s “internal waters” positions in these two waterways.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 3 |
ID:
165683
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Ever since allegations arose of Russian meddling in the 2016 United States presidential election, cyber influence operations have garnered worldwide attention. This article examines the different options available under international law for holding States responsible for cyber influence operations on elections. To this end, the article first elaborates a typology of different cyber election meddling techniques, before examining three paradigms of international law that may be relied upon to frame State responses to cyber influence operations—the general public international law paradigm, the human rights paradigm, and the State liability paradigm. The article concludes by considering why States have so far avoided the vocabulary of international law in formulating their responses to cyber influence operations and offers a suggestion as to where international law may have a more central role to play in this context in the future.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 4 |
ID:
165689
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
In recent years, China has adopted and/or revised a series of laws and regulations concerning the protection of the marine environment. This paper aims to provide an overview of the recent developments in this respect and to highlight some new and innovative law-making efforts in China1to further strengthen the marine environmental protection and sustainable use of marine natural resources
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 5 |
ID:
165688
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
The equal right of labor and anti-discrimination in occupation or employment is guaranteed in international conventions and most domestic laws. Revisiting the Mr. C. case, China should conduct legal reform to implement international law on the equal right of labor of employees including transgender minorities. China should enact an anti-discrimination law to transform international law into Chinese domestic law. Employment or occupational discrimination should be added as grounds for legal action. Reversal of burden of proof should be applied in the trial of the cases concerning equal right of labor, and compensation for emotional damage as well as punitive damages as remedies for the victims should be provided for. Efficiency of labor arbitration and administrative labor supervision should be strengthened in eliminating gender discrimination in employment or occupation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 6 |
ID:
165687
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
In the past one hundred years, a series of international cases have addressed the group or unity principle in the context of territorial allocation. This article provides an analysis of such jurisprudence, and concludes that this principle can act as a mediating principle to inform the interpretation and application of the primary rules relating to territorial acquisition, thus raising a presumption about the extent and scope of an established territorial title. By showing respect for the natural link between land territories that form an integral group or unity, this principle might provide an efficient and pragmatic approach to settling territorial disputes.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 7 |
ID:
165685
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
The presence of third States occurs when two countries delimit their maritime boundary in a maritime area where there are more than two coastal States. The bilateral nature of maritime delimitation between two States requires the delimitation process not to prejudice the legal rights and interests of third States. On the one hand, at the procedural stage of international adjudication, third States may file an application for permission to intervene in the proceedings before a court or tribunal; at the merits stage, a third-party judicial organ may leave undecided the endpoint of a final boundary line to be delimited, so as not to affect the rights of a third State. On the other hand, in interstate maritime boundary agreements through international negotiation, in order to take care of third States’ legal rights and interests, States may adopt several ways of addressing the existence of tripoints. This paper, in four parts, discusses the presence of third States in international maritime boundary delimitation. The first part gives a definition of a third State in the framework of maritime delimitation. The second part reflects on international adjudication relating to the presence of third States. The third part provides some observations on State practices relating to the existence of tripoints. The conclusion points out that there is a widening gap between maritime delimitation in theory and in practice, since recent case law particularly confines the delimitation to a purely bilateral status, without enough focus on the presence of third States, resulting in procedurally prejudicial impacts upon the legal rights and interests of third States.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|