Notes to Chapter One
1.WILLIAM M.RICHMAN,AND MILLIAM L.REYNOLDS,UNDERSTANDING CONFLICT OF LAWS 162 (2003).
2.FRIEDRICH K.JUENGER,CHOICE OF LAW AND MULTISTATE JUSTICE 70 (2000).
3.[1996] 1 W.L.R.387.
4.See DICEY & MORRIS ON THE CONFLICT OF LAWS 42 (Lawrence Collins ed.,13th ed.,1999).
5.Zhonghua Renmin Gongheguo Minfa Tongze [GPCL] art.145 (1986) (PRC); Zhonghua Renmin Gongheguo Hetongfa [Contract Act] art.126 (1999) (PRC).
6.Convention for the Unification of Certain Rules for International Carriage by Air (Montreal,28 May 1999).
7.Zhonghua Renmin Gongheguo Minfa Tongze [GPCL] art.146 (1986) (PRC).
8.GUOJI SIFA [PRIVATE INTERNATIONAL LAW] 187-188 (Huang Jin ed.,2nd ed.,2004).
9.Id,at 189.
10.GEORGE PANAGOPOULOUS,RESTITUTION IN PRIVATE INTERNATIONAL LAW 38 (2000).
11.See MARTIN WOLFF,PRIVATE INTERNATIONAL LAW 195 (2nd ed.,1950).
12.PETER NORTH & J.J.FAWCETT,CHESHIRE AND NORTH’S PRIVATE INTERNATIONAL LAW 37 (13th ed.,1999).
13.See GUOJI SIFA [PRIVATE INTERNATIONAL LAW] 189-190 (Huang Jin ed.,2nd ed.,2004).
14.PETER NORTH & J.J.FAWCETT,CHESHIRE AND NORTH’S PRIVATE INTERNATIONAL LAW 37 (13th ed.,1999).
15.A.E.ANTON,PRIVATE INTERNATIONAL LAW 67 (2nd ed.,1990).
16.A.H.ROBERTSON,CHARACTERIZATION IN THE CONFLICT OF LAWs 63,83,118-120 (1940).
17.See Bathyanay v.Walford (1887) 36 Ch.D.269; Ogden v.Ogden [1908] P.46; Apt v.Apt [1948] P.83; National Bank of Greece and Athens S.A.v.Metliss [1957] A.C.509; Adams v.National Bank of Greece S.A.[1961] A.C.255; G & H Montage GmbH v.Irvani [1990] 1 W.L.R.667,678 per Mustill L.J.(C.A.); Macmillan Inc.v.Bishopsgate Investment Trust Plc (No.3) [1996] 1 W.L.R.387,407,per Auld L.J.
18.See Art.12(1) of the Spanish Civil Code; KEGEL,INTERNATIONALES PRIVATRECHT 246-247 (7th ed.,1995); J.KROPHOLLER,INTERNATIONALES PRIVATRECHT106-111 (3rd.ed.,1997); R.VAN ROOIJ AND M.V.POLAK,PRIVATE INTERNATIONAL LAW IN THE NETHERLANDS 241(1987); M.REIMANN,CONFLICT OF LAWS IN WESTERN EUROPE 26 (1995); P.MAYER,DROIT INTERNATIONAL PRIVÉ 108-116,(6th ed.,1998).(https://www.daowen.com)
19.PETER NORTH & J.J.FAWCETT,CHESHIRE AND NORTH’S PRIVATE INTERNATIONAL LAW 38-39 (13th ed.,1999); DICEY & MORRIS ON THE CONFLICT OF LAWS 38-43,45-48 (Lawrence Collins ed.,13th ed.,1999).
20.GEORGE PANAGOPOULOUS,RESTITUTION IN PRIVATE INTERNATIONAL LAW 33 (2000).
21.Robertson,op cit.,p.33.
22.De Micols v.Curlier [1900] AC 21.
23.Peter North & J.J.Fawcett,CHESHIRE AND NORTH’S PRIVATE INTERNATIONAL LAW 39 (13th ed.,1999).
24.Weidong Zhu,China’s Codification of the Conflict of Laws,3 JOURNAL OF PRIVATE INTERNATIONAL LAW 2,288 (2008).
25.Zuigao Renmin Fayuan Gongbao 4 [Bulletin of Supreme People’s Court] 130-134 (2000) (PRC).
26.CHINESE SOCIETY OF PRIVATE INTERNATIONAL LAW,MODEL LAW OF PRIVATE INTERNATIONAL LAW OF THE PEOPLE’S REPUBLIC OF CHINA (2000); English version,3 YEARBOOK OF PRIVATE INTERNATIONAL LAW 349-390 (Petar Sarczvic & Paul Volken eds.,2001).
27.Weidong Zhu,China’s Codification of the Conflict of Laws,3 JOURNAL OF PRIVATE INTERNATIONAL LAW 2,288 (2008).
28.Zhonghua Renmin Gongheguo Shewai Minshi Falvguanxi Shiyongfa [Act on the Application of Laws over Foreign-related Civil Relationships] art.8 (2010) (PRC).
29.Eg,the characterization that the Chinese court made in the case of Retrial Concerning Releasing Cargo Without Bill of Lading: American President Shipping Company v Feida Appliance Factory,Feili Company & Changcheng Company,for its final judgment made by the Supreme People’s Court.
【注释】
[1]This is the basic position both under common law,and under civil law.See GEORGE PANAGOPOULOUS,RESTITUTION IN PRIVATE INTERNATIONAL LAW 33 (2000).
[2]American scholars speak of “characterization,” their English counterparts of “qualification,” and French of “qualification.” See FRIEDRICH K.JUENGER,CHOICE OF LAW AND MULTISTATE JUSTICE 4 (2000).
[3]This is only a presumptive example to illustrate the process of “characterization”.As a matter of fact,the Montreal Convention shall govern the dispute described in this case,irrespective of its cause of action.
[4]This is termed as “waiver by election of remedies” in common law doctrine under which a defense arising when a plaintiff has sought two inconsistent remedies and by a decisive act chooses one of them,thereby waiving the other.BLACK’S LAW DICTIONARY1718 (Bryan A.Garner ed.,9th ed.,2009).
[5]Article 195 of the Judicial Interpretation of the Supreme People’s Court: “[T]ime limitation for action shall be determined according to the applicable law governing the civil legal relation that is determined pursuant to the rule of conflict of laws.” In view of this,time limitations for actions are characterized as substantive issues.Zuigao Renmin Fayuan Guanyu Shiyong Zhonghua Renmin Gongheguo Minfatongze Ruogan Wenti de Yijian[Supreme People’s Court,Opinions on Application of the General Principle of Civil Law of the People’s Republic of China],92 Zuigao Renmin Fayuan Gongbao 22[Bulletin of Supreme People’s Court] art.195 (1988) (PRC).