论文部分内容阅读
我国《法律适用法》规定了中国强制规范的直接适用。此类规范是否能被域外法院承认成为亟待解决的问题,特别是在美国等没有第三国强制规范适用制度的国家。在实践中,纽约法院会采用冲突法、实体法和国际法三种方法分析中国强制规范的适用。根据《第二次冲突法重述》第187条第2款,冲突法方法的解决规则是,如果当事人另行选择的法律没有合理的基础,或所选法律的适用将违反为强制规范所反映的拥有更大利益法域的中国的基本政策,则具有客观准据法地位的中国强制规范能够否定选法条款的效力;实体法方法是,在纽约法满足《纽约债法》第5-1401条的要求得以适用的情况下,如果当事人缔约时有意违反中国强制规范,纽约法院将不会强制执行该构成履行地国法下非法的合同;国际法方法则是基于中美同为其缔约国的《国际货币基金协定》第8条第2款b项的规定。
China’s “Law Applicable Law” stipulates the direct application of China’s compulsory norms. Whether such norms can be recognized by extraterritorial courts is an issue to be solved urgently, especially in countries such as the United States that do not have a system of mandatory norms applicable by a third country. In practice, the New York court will use the conflict law, substantive law and international law three methods to analyze the application of Chinese coercive norms. According to Paragraph 2 of Article 187 of the Second Conflict of Acts of Conflict, the solution to the conflict of laws method is that if the law otherwise chosen by the parties does not have a reasonable basis or the application of the law of choice would be contrary to what is reflected in the peremptory norm China’s basic policy of having a larger area of interests, then the Chinese coercive norms that have objectively lawful status can negate the validity of the electoral law. The substantive law method is that when the New York law satisfies the requirements of Article 5-1401 of the New York Debt Law Requirements apply, if the parties deliberately violated China’s compulsory norms when contracting, the New York court will not enforce the contract that is illegal under the law of the country that constitutes the performance. The international law method is based on the principle of "International Monetary Fund Article 8, paragraph 2 (b), of the Agreement.