Skip Navigation


Chinese Journal of International Law Advance Access originally published online on June 21, 2007
Chinese Journal of International Law 2007 6(2):345-361; doi:10.1093/chinesejil/jmm021
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
6/2/345    most recent
jmm021v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Leyda, J. A. C.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author 2007. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved

BRIEF COMMENTS, ESSAYS & NOTES

A Uniform, Internationally Oriented Legal Framework for the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards in Mainland China, Hong Kong and Taiwan?

José Alejandro Carballo Leyda*

Correspondence: * LLM London, PhD Candidate, Lawyer at the Cuatrecasas Spanish law firm (www.cuatrecasas.com); Co-chairman of ASIL Private International Law Interest Group (e-mail: alex.carballo{at}cuatrecasas.com). This paper was completed in January 2007.

The growth in commercial transactions with Mainland China, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region and the Taiwan region (Taiwan) as well as the economic integration in the entire area have lead to an increase in disputes. Considering the importance of arbitration as a mechanism for resolving commercial disputes in the area, the paper discusses whether a substantial "clash" between their legal frameworks for the recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitral awards can be observed. After a critical analysis, the paper concludes that these frameworks are either subject to or modelled on the New York Convention. Yet, each has a distinct approach to the implementation, and dissimilarities arise. Furthermore, the specific legal framework for the recognition and enforcement of Mainland China awards in Hong Kong and Taiwan, and vice versa, still raises some concerns and is not fully reliable.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer:
Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.