Gemaier hotel

April 7, 2006 Hao Zhonghua

Case analysis of private international law

200565438+February 22nd Administrator

1In August 1997, French businessman Bill took a taxi from a hotel in Wuhan to the railway station. When the bus arrived at the station, Bill left a handbag with valuables in the taxi. After the driver found the wallet, he failed to find the owner.

After Bill lost his bag, he put a notice on Wuhan Evening News of Wuhan People's Broadcasting Station, saying that there would be a reward for finding the lost bag, and announced his contact information.

The next day, Lingmou returned the bag to Bill. Bill kept his promise and paid the fee.

After Bill's wallet was found, she entrusted Ms. Fan, a native of China, to complain to the Wuhan Public Management Office. After many twists and turns, the public management office found Ling, who was paid. The public management office informed Ling to go to the public management office to explain the situation. Lingmou admitted the fact that he accepted the reward and wrote down "the process of picking things up". On March 10, Lingmou paid the remuneration to the public administration office, which handed it over to the owner. On the grounds of "reporting pending investigation", the public administration temporarily detained the employment certificate of taxi Ling, and requested to be dealt with at the designated time and place.

Lingmou felt wronged and filed an administrative lawsuit with the Hankou District People's Court in Wuhan, demanding that the public administration office return the remuneration. After the court accepts it, it will hold a hearing. Q:

1) Which country's laws should be applied to the foreign-related civil relations in this case? A:

Bill took a taxi and signed a foreign transportation contract with Ling. According to the principle of closest connection, the applicable law of this legal relationship is the law of China.

Bill released a reward advertisement, and Lingmou returned his wallet, which constituted a reward contract relationship. According to the principle of closest connection, the law of China should be the applicable law.

After Bill's wallet was recovered, he entrusted an agent to lodge a complaint, making Ling pay against his true intention. Bill's demand for remuneration constitutes unjust enrichment. This legal relationship is governed by international practices and China laws.

Emerson, an American, came to teach at a university in China. During her teaching, she married Tian, a female teacher in China who taught in a university. After the marriage, Emerson sued the Shanghai Intermediate People's Court for divorce because of the emotional disharmony between the two parties. After the prosecution. Emerson will return to China after the teaching period expires. Emerson brought a lawsuit to the court, entrusting an American teacher who also teaches at the school or entrusting the consul of the American Consulate in Shanghai to represent the lawsuit.

Q: In this case, is it correct for Emerson to entrust others to represent the lawsuit? Why? A:

Emerson's method is reasonable. In China, China citizens can be entrusted as agents ad litem. Our country implements national treatment for foreigners in our country and allows foreigners to entrust foreigners with the same nationality as litigation agents.

Officials of foreign embassies and consulates in China may be entrusted by their own citizens to act as agents ad litem in their own names. According to the provisions of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations, to which China is a contracting party, when a foreigner who is a contracting party is not in China,

Or for other reasons, foreign consuls in China may directly act as their representatives or arrange their own representatives to appear in court.

3. Qian, a citizen of China, went to study in Japan on 1992. 1995 On the eve of returning to China, he was knocked down by a freight truck on his way to work and died after being rescued. Qian's wife, Li, accompanied by Qian's younger brother as an authorized agent, went to Japan to take care of the funeral. After consultation, the Japanese side compensated 5 million yen.

After returning to China, Li and Qian had a dispute over the distribution of inheritance, and the negotiations failed. Qian's family sued Li and his daughter to the local people's court.

Q: How should the law be applied in this case? Explain why. A: The applicable law in this case should be Japanese law.

Qian did not leave a will before his death, and his inheritance is legal inheritance. According to Article 149 of the General Principles of Civil Law of People's Republic of China (PRC), the law of the decedent's domicile shall apply to the legal inheritance of the estate, and Japanese law shall apply to this case.

Money has two residences. One is a legal residence in China, and the other is a temporary residence in Japan. Because Li has lived in Japan for two years, Japan's temporary residence is also a residence. According to the relevant laws and regulations of China, Li's residence at the time of his death was in Japan.

4.1On May 7th, 988, a Japanese company filed an application for the invention patent of "eye fatigue prevention lens" with the Japanese patent agency. After that, the company submitted an application for a patent for invention with the same theme to the China Patent Office on June 3, 1988, and made a written statement of priority. On February 25, 1988, the company submitted a copy of Japan's first patent application to the China Patent Office.

1In July, 988, the Institute of Optics of a university in China also successfully developed a kind of lens to relieve eye fatigue caused by screen. Compared with the lens of a Japanese company, this lens has the same specific structure, technical treatment and technical effect. On September 1988, the Institute of Optics of a university in China submitted an application for the invention patent of "health lens" to the China Patent Office.

(Note: China and Japan are both parties to the 1883 Paris Convention for the Protection of Industrial Property) Q: Who should the Chinese Patent Office grant the patent right to? Why? A:

China Patent Office should grant a Japanese company a patent right.

China and Japan are both parties to the Paris Convention for the Protection of Industrial Property. Therefore, the dispute over who granted the patent right in this case should be based on the Paris Convention for the Protection of Industrial Property.

The Paris Convention for the Protection of Industrial Property stipulates the principle of priority, and the priority of an invention patent application is 12 months. According to the laws of our country, foreigners who apply for patents in our country will enjoy the priority stipulated in the convention as long as they submit the necessary documents according to our laws.

Although the Institute of Optics of a university in China applied for a patent in the Chinese Patent Office before a Japanese company, this kind of application is not enough to counter the priority stipulated in the convention, so the patent right should be granted to a Japanese company.

King Bian He is a citizen of China and lives in Brazil after marriage. Due to a marriage dispute, and Brazilian law does not allow divorce, the husband and wife reached a long-term separation agreement on 1986 according to Brazilian law, and requested the consular section of the Embassy of China in Brazil to recognize it and assist in its implementation.

Q: Should China recognize and assist in the implementation of the separation agreement reached between Bian and Wang? Why? A:

China's embassies in foreign countries shall implement the laws of China when dealing with matters related to citizens of China. The separation agreement does not conform to the provisions of China's marriage law, so it cannot be recognized and assisted in implementation. The separation agreement was reached in a way permitted by Brazilian law, so we can only apply to the relevant Brazilian parties for recognition according to the procedures stipulated by Brazilian law.

The separation agreement between Bian and Wang was reached according to Brazilian law, and the prohibition of divorce in Brazilian law conflicts with the relevant provisions of China's marriage law. Recognizing and assisting in the implementation of the separation agreement reached between Bian and Wang violates the public order and good customs of our country, and our country cannot recognize the validity of the separation agreement between Bian and Wang.

A country's courts and embassies abroad can only recognize and enforce the judgments of a country's courts or the rulings of arbitration institutions, but not the agreements between the parties. 6.

China citizen Xia Mou (male) and China citizen Feng Mou (female) got married in Shenyang on 1997. After the marriage, Xia went to Canada to study at her own expense, and got a master's degree in 200 1, and then found a job in a company in New York, USA. In August 2002, Xia filed a divorce lawsuit in new york on the grounds of long-term separation between husband and wife. The divorce petition was sent to Feng by Xia's lawyer. After consultation, Feng filed a divorce lawsuit with Shenyang Intermediate People's Court.

Q: After the New York State Court accepted Xia's divorce lawsuit, can our court accept Feng's divorce lawsuit?

A: After the New York court accepted Xia's divorce lawsuit, the China court can still accept Feng's divorce lawsuit. For foreign-related divorce cases, in order to protect the interests of China citizens to the greatest extent, China does not object to two lawsuits for one thing, and one party files a divorce lawsuit in a foreign country, which does not prevent our courts from accepting the divorce lawsuit filed by China citizens.

7. 1997, Yu Mou, a citizen of China, married Yamaguchi, a Japanese citizen, in China, and they had a son in China. 1999, Yamaguchi returned to Japan to live alone. 200 1 filed a divorce lawsuit in China court on the grounds of long-term separation and indifference between husband and wife. Yamaguchi agreed to divorce. On the issue of custody and custody of children, the two sides have disputes. Yamaguchi asked to bring his son back to Japan to be raised by her, and Yu asked to keep his son in China to be raised by him.

Q: In this case, which country's law should be applied? Why? A:

Article 148 of the General Principles of Civil Law of People's Republic of China (PRC) stipulates: "Maintenance shall be governed by the laws of the country with the closest relationship with the dependents". Yu and Natsuo Yamaguchi were born in China and have China nationality. His father is a citizen of China and holds China nationality. He has been living in China since he was born, so China has the closest connection with him. This case shall be governed by the laws of China.

In addition, Article 20 of the Japanese Law stipulates that "the legal relationship between parents and children shall be governed by the laws of the parent country". Father Yu is a citizen of China. According to Japanese law, China law should also be applied to this case.

8. China citizen Shen Mou (male) and China citizen Liang Mou (female) got married in China on 1939, and they had two daughters. Shen went to Taiwan Province Province on 1949 and became a Canadian citizen on 1988. After the two sides separated, there was frequent communication. Liang went to Canada to live with Shen on 1975. After 1984, Shen went back to China once a year and bought three houses for decoration. 1989, Liang and Shen had a conflict in the United States, and Shen came to China alone to live with a woman. After Liang learned of this situation, he asked Shen to sever the relationship with the cohabiting woman. Cao refused to listen, and went to the Canadian court to sue for divorce, which was allowed. 199 1 In March, Shen came to China again, and in August 17, he went to Shaoxing Civil Affairs Bureau for marriage registration.

199 1 year 14 February 14, Liang filed a lawsuit with Shaoxing Intermediate People's Court, demanding divorce from Shen, dividing the * * * property during the existence of the husband-wife relationship, and demanding that Shen pay the living expenses and alimony.

Q: 1. Does Shaoxing Intermediate People's Court have jurisdiction over this case? Explain why. 2. How should the law be applied in this case? A:

1. Shaoxing Intermediate People's Court can accept this divorce case. Shen divorced in a Canadian court and got permission. Shen and Liang dissolved their marriage in Canada. Decisions of Canadian courts do not automatically take effect in China. Only when the parties request recognition and enforcement from the China court in China, the China court considers that the recognition and enforcement of the judgment does not conflict with the public order in China, and the China court makes a ruling that the judgment of a foreign court takes legal effect in China, can the judgment of a foreign court take legal effect in China. Shen didn't apply for recognition of foreign court's judgment in China court, so Canadian court's judgment has no legal effect in China, and China court has the right to accept Liang's divorce lawsuit.

2. After accepting divorce cases in China, China law should be applied as the applicable law. According to article 147 of the General Principles of Civil Law of People's Republic of China (PRC).

9. An Englishman went to a casino in Honduras to gamble. After losing money, he borrowed $654.38 million+from the casino, and lost the $654.38 million+without paying it back. Hondurans who run casinos filed a lawsuit in a British court, asking the court to order the borrower to repay the loan. British law stipulates that it is a crime to run a casino, but Honduran law allows it.

Q: Is the contractual relationship established in this case? How should English courts apply the law? A:

The loan contract in this case was established. Because the loan contract was signed and performed in Honduras, the law of the place where the contract was concluded and the law of the place where the contract was performed should be applied to judge the effectiveness of the contract, that is, the law of Honduras. According to Honduran law, the loan contract is valid.

However, the Honduran government's law allowing casinos conflicts with the British law prohibiting casinos. English courts can apply public order reservation to exclude the validity of Honduran laws in the United States and dismiss the prosecution against Hondurans.

10. Bank A in Hong Kong signed a loan contract and a mortgage contract with Company B in China. In this contract, both parties agree that in case of dispute, Hong Kong law shall be the applicable law. After the contract is signed, Bank A in Hong Kong will provide all loans according to the contract. When the loan was due, Company B in China only repaid a small part of the loan. Bank A of Hong Kong filed a lawsuit in the court where the defendant lived, requesting the court to order the defendant to repay the loan. The court accepted the case. According to the agreement on the application of law in the contract, the court informed the parties to provide Hong Kong laws on the loan contract and mortgage contract. Both parties failed to provide Hong Kong laws on loan contracts and mortgage contracts within the time limit stipulated by the court.

Q: 1. Can Hong Kong laws be applied to this case?

2. If both parties fail to provide Hong Kong laws on loan contracts and mortgage contracts within the time limit stipulated by the court, which laws should the court apply? A:

1. Hong Kong law can be applied as the applicable law in this case, because both parties agreed in the contract that Hong Kong law should be applied in case of dispute, which is in line with China law.

2. If neither the parties nor the court can find the applicable legal content, the court shall apply the laws of China.

11.At the age of 20, Pierre, a Frenchman, signed a contract for the purchase and sale of raw materials with a company in China in China. After the signing of the contract, the price of raw materials in the international market rose sharply, and Pierre Company failed to fulfill the contract. Company A of China filed a lawsuit in China court, requesting the court to order Pierre to bear the liability for breach of contract.

Pierre replied that the age of an adult in French law is 265,438+0, and he was 65,438+09 when he signed the contract. As a minor, he does not have full capacity and should not be liable for breach of contract. Q:

Should Pierre be liable for breach of contract? Why? A: Pierre should be responsible for the breach of contract.

According to the judicial interpretation of the Supreme People's Court, China, foreigners who engage in civil activities in China do not have capacity for civil conduct according to their own laws, but have capacity for civil conduct according to the laws of the place where they act shall be deemed to have capacity for civil conduct.

The contract in this case was signed by Pierre and China A Company in China, and the place of performance of the contract was also China. It shall be deemed that the place of the contract is in China, and the law of China shall be applied to determine whether Pierre has the capacity to act.

According to Chinese laws, 18 years old is an adult, and Pierre was 19 years old when he signed the contract. He has full capacity and should be liable for breach of contract.

12. A local product company in China signed a purchase and sale contract with a company in Singapore, and a local product company in China exported a batch of red dates to a company in Singapore. According to the contract, the red dates exported by a local company in China to a Singaporean company are rated as Grade III. After the contract was signed, a company in Singapore applied to the bank to open a letter of credit. At the time of delivery, a domestic local company was out of stock of third-grade red dates, so it was delivered with second-grade red dates, and the invoice indicated that the price of second-grade red dates remained unchanged, and the payment was still made at the third-grade price. A domestic product company thinks that the quality of the goods is higher than that stipulated in the contract and the price remains unchanged, so the buyer will not raise any objection. On the contrary, after delivery, a domestic native company went to the bank to negotiate the payment, and the issuing bank refused to pay on the grounds that the documents did not conform to the contract. A local company in China asked a Singaporean company to amend the letter of credit, but it was rejected. A Singaporean company accused a local company in China of breach of contract and demanded to bear the responsibility for breach of contract.

Q: 1) What is the law to adjust the relationship between letters of credit? 2) Does the issuing bank have the right to refuse to pay? A:

1) In international commercial relations, the law to adjust the relationship between letters of credit is usually the uniform practice of documentary letters of credit generally adopted by all countries.

2) The bank has the right to refuse to pay for the goods. The Uniform Customs and Practice for Documentary Credits stipulates that the documents delivered by the seller for negotiation of payment must be consistent with the agreement in the contract, so that the documents are consistent with each other. If the seller's documents for payment for negotiation are inconsistent with the contract, the bank has the right to refuse to pay the payment. In this case, the invoice delivered by a local product company in China is inconsistent with the contract, and the bank has the right to refuse to pay the payment.

13. Wang Meimei, a citizen of China, settled in Indonesia with his parents in 1948 and became an Indonesian citizen in 1958. 1995, Wang Meimei's husband passed away, and Wang Meimei has no other relatives except one son. From 65438 to 0996, Wang Meimei sold her Indonesian property and returned to China with her son. After returning to China, Wang Meimei bought an apartment to live in. Wang Meimei's son lost his job and lived on Wang Meimei's savings. Wang Meimei is very disgusted with her son who likes leisure and hates work. She repeatedly urged her son to stand on his own feet, but he turned a deaf ear. Wang Meimei then strengthened its control over the property. Wang Meimei's son is not satisfied with his mother. He injured his mother twice in 1997 and 1998, and was rescued by the dog who accompanied his mother day and night. Wang Meimei is old. She has been assassinated twice by her rebellious son. She was exhausted and knew she was going to die soon. 1at the end of 998, Wang Meimei found a lawyer and made a written will:

First, cancel the son's inheritance right. 2. After my death, I can still keep about RMB 65438+ 10,000, which will be inherited by my dog. This money is in the charge of my lawyer and used for love.

Living expenses for dogs. The daily life of a dog is taken care of by a lawyer. 1. After the lawyer performs the delivery obligation, the apartment shall be owned by the lawyer.

Wang Meimei died shortly after making a will. The lawyer buried the dead. Wang Meimei's pet dog waited in front of Wang Meimei's grave and died tragically for four days and four nights without eating or drinking. Q:

1) Which country's laws apply to determine the validity of Wang Meimei's will? 2) How to deal with Wang Meimei's legacy? A:

1) The legal application of foreign-related wills is not clearly defined in Chinese laws. In judicial practice, the form of will is very important.

According to the principle of location domination, the law of the place where the will was made shall apply, and the substantive elements of the will shall be treated with reference to the principle of legal application of legal succession. Wang Meimei's will was made in China, and the form of the will is required to be governed by the laws of China. The essential elements of a will should be treated with reference to the principle of legal application of legal succession in China. Real estate shall be governed by the law of the place where the real estate is located, and movable property shall be governed by the law of the place where the decedent died. The estate left by the decedent is in China, and the decedent's domicile at the time of his death is also in China. Therefore, the substantive elements of a will should be governed by the laws of China.

2) According to the laws of China, the will is partially valid. Deprivation of his son's inheritance is partially effective.

It is invalid for a dog to inherit part of his will. In China, dogs cannot be the subject of inheritance. After the death of the dog, this part of the inheritance became the property that no one inherited and reverted to the state.

The will to pay the lawyer's remuneration is valid. Because the loyal dog died with the Lord, the lawyer could not fulfill the duty of care required by the will. Therefore, the lawyer's part of the work in the estate should be paid, and the rest belongs to the property that no one inherits and nationalizes.

On April 30th, 14. 1986, Dalian Native Produce Import & Export Corporation signed a contract for the sale of plastic woven bags, and Agri Norway Co., Ltd. purchased1/kloc-0 from Dalian Native Produce Import & Export Corporation at a price of 950 USD/ton. The first batch of goods delivered by Dalian Native Products Import and Export Corporation according to the contract was shipped in Dalian Port on February 27th 1987, and the second batch was shipped in Dalian Port in two batches on March 7th and March 27th of the same year. For the above two shipments, Norwegian Li Aige Co., Ltd. will pay by letter of credit within 90 days from the date of issuance of the bill of lading. However, after receiving the goods, Norwegian Agricultural Co., Ltd. applied to the court of the Kingdom of Norway to detain the funds under the above two letters of credit on the grounds that Dalian Native Products Import and Export Corporation had breached the contract. Accordingly, the issuing bank, Credit Suisse Oriental Bank, has informed China Bank in writing that the payment for these two batches of goods has not been paid yet. Dalian Native Produce Import & Export Company filed a lawsuit to terminate the contract and ordered Norway Agri Co., Ltd. to pay the overdue payment. The Norwegian company Aigley Co., Ltd. did not raise a defense.

Excuse me: 1) In this case, Dalian Native Produce Import and Export Corporation filed a lawsuit in China court. Do local courts in China have jurisdiction? 2) Can China law be applied to this case, and what is its legal basis?

Reference answer

1) The courts in China have jurisdiction. Regarding the contract dispute in this case, although Norwegian Agricultural Co., Ltd. has applied to the court of the Kingdom of Norway to detain the payment due to Dalian Native Produce Import and Export Company, because the two parties did not agree on the applicable law in the contract, Dalian Native Produce Import and Export Company appealed the contract dispute to the court in China, where the contract was performed, and the court in China had jurisdiction.

2) About the application of law. The parties to this case did not stipulate the applicable provisions of law in the contract. Therefore, according to Article 145 of the General Principles of Civil Law, the law of the country with the closest connection with the contract should be applied to this case. As the contract in this case was signed in China and the port of shipment was in China, according to the CIF price terms, Company A, as the seller, paid the freight and insurance premium and assumed the risk before the goods crossed the ship's rail. Therefore, the country most closely related to the contract in this case is China, and the laws of China should be applied.

15. Company A and Company B are both enterprise legal persons registered in Hong Kong. 1986 In March, Company B and Company C signed a contract in Guangzhou to jointly operate a hotel in Guangzhou. In order to raise funds for cooperative operation, Company B and Company A signed a loan agreement in Hong Kong in September, 1986. According to the contract, the loan agreement shall be governed by the laws of China and Hongkong. After Company B defaulted on the due loan and interest for many times, Company A asked Company B to repay the loan but failed, so it filed a lawsuit with Guangzhou Towel People's Court. Company B responded to the lawsuit and agreed to apply the laws of China to handle the case.

I want to ask: l) Does Guangzhou Intermediate People's Court have jurisdiction over this case? 2) Can China's substantive law be used as the applicable law for handling this case? A:

1) has jurisdiction over this case. As both parties are legal persons in Hong Kong, the place of signing and performance of the contract is also in Hong Kong, and there is no written agreement between the two parties to choose the jurisdiction of the mainland courts, this case is not under the jurisdiction of the mainland courts. The loan obtained by Company B was invested in a cooperative enterprise in Guangzhou. Company A sued the Guangzhou court, but Company B did not raise any objection and responded. According to the provisions of Articles 243rd and 245th of China's Civil Procedure Law, Guangzhou Intermediate People's Court is the court where Company B owns the property that can be sealed up, and it is regarded as a court with jurisdiction. Have jurisdiction over this case.

2) The laws of China shall apply. Company A and Company B agreed in the contract that the laws of Hongkong and People's Republic of China (PRC) shall apply to the dispute. However, in the proceedings, both parties agreed to apply the laws of People's Republic of China (PRC). According to Article 145 of General Principles of Civil Law of People's Republic of China (PRC) and General Principles of Civil Law of People's Republic of China (PRC), the parties to a foreign-related contract can choose the applicable law for handling contract disputes, and the applicable law in this case is China substantive law.

16.

An import and export company in Shandong signed a contract with a foreign company to import 5000 tons of urea. According to the contract, we opened an irrevocable documentary letter of credit in favor of foreign companies, with a total amount of $654.38+$480,000. Both parties agree to submit any dispute to China Beijing International Economic and Trade Arbitration Commission for arbitration. 1990 after the delivery in June, the foreign company will negotiate the payment in the bank with the bill of lading. After the goods arrived in Qingdao, our company found that urea had serious quality problems, and immediately asked the commodity inspection authorities to inspect and confirm that this batch of urea was useless waste. Our company requires the bank to recover the payment with the commodity inspection certificate, otherwise it will refuse to pay the bank.

I would like to ask: 1) whether the bank should recover the paid money and why? 2) Does our company have the right to refuse to pay the bank? Why?

3) Does China International Economic and Trade Arbitration Commission accept the case? Why? Answer: 1) Banks should not recover the paid money because they have fulfilled their obligation to check the conformity of documents.

2) Our company has no right to refuse to pay the bank, because the settlement of the letter of credit should adhere to the principle of independence of the letter of credit, that is, the letter of credit procedure is not affected by the performance of the contract, and the bank only has the obligation to check the conformity of the documents, and the contract problems should be solved by the parties themselves.

3) According to the arbitration clause in the contract, China International Economic and Trade Arbitration Commission has the right to accept the case.

17.1In August 1997, British company A (the seller) entered into a contract with China company B (the buyer) to buy and sell 200 computers, each of which was paid by irrevocable letter of credit, and delivered in new york port in February. 1September, 99715th, Bank of China Shanghai Branch (the issuing bank) issued an irrevocable letter of credit to the seller in the amount of 200,000 US dollars according to the buyer's instructions, and entrusted Citibank in new york to notify and negotiate this letter of credit. 1997, 1997, on February 20th, the seller shipped 200 computers and obtained the bills of lading, insurance policies, invoices and other documents required by the letter of credit, and then went to the British negotiating bank for negotiation. After examination, the documents are consistent, and the bank will pay the seller $200,000. At the same time, on 10 day after the cargo ship left new york port, all cargo ships and goods sank into the sea due to heavy rain and reefs during the voyage. At this time, the issuing bank has received a full set of documents from the negotiating bank, and the buyer has learned that all the purchased goods have been lost. Bank of China Shanghai Branch intends to refuse to pay the negotiating bank $200,000 on the grounds that its customers can't get the expected goods.

Excuse me: (1) When did the risk of this shipment pass from the seller to the buyer? (2) Can the issuing bank be exempted from the payment obligation due to the total loss of the goods? What is the basis?

Reference answer: (1 > The goods are delivered to the ship at the port of shipment, and the risk is transferred from the seller to the buyer.

(2) The issuing bank has no right to refuse payment. According to the uniform customs of documentary credit formulated by the International Chamber of Commerce, the letter of credit transaction is independent of the sales contract, and the bank is only responsible for reviewing the documents. As long as the documents conform to the terms of the letter of credit, the bank should bear its payment obligations.

18. A Russian agent loaded the goods on a German ship at a Russian port and passed through Hull Port, England, to give them to the consignee Kemal, who is British and lives in England. The ship had an accident near the Norwegian coast, but the cargo landed safely. The captain sold the goods to a bona fide third party, and the third party sold the goods to the defendant in Seville, Norway, and the defendant shipped the goods to Britain. Kemal, the consignee, filed a lawsuit in the English court for the return of the goods. According to Norwegian law, the captain in this case has the right to sell the goods in case of distress, and the bona fide buyer has the right to obtain the ownership of the goods; However, if the captain sells the goods without justifiable reasons, he shall be responsible to the original owner of the goods. The English court held that according to Norwegian law, the defendant Xavier obtained the legal ownership of the goods. Norway is a place where things are bought and sold when they are established, and its laws should be applied. Therefore, the British court rejected Kemal's claim.

Excuse me: What kind of "attribution formula" did the British court adopt in this case? And explain this genus formula. Reference answer:

In the trial of this case, the English court handled the dispute in this case by the law of the location of things.

"The law of the location of things" is an important principle of private international law to solve the conflict of real rights laws. "The law of the location of things" refers to the law of the location of the object of the real right relationship. The location law of the real right of immovable property has become a universally recognized principle. China's General Principles of Civil Law and the Supreme People's Court's Opinions on Several Issues Concerning the Implementation of General Principles of Civil Law in People's Republic of China (PRC) (Trial) stipulate that the law of the place where the real estate is located shall apply to civil relations such as ownership, sale, lease, mortgage and use of the real estate.

The law of the location of things is applicable to the identification or distinction between movable property and immovable property, the scope of the object of real right, the types and contents of real right, the acquisition, transfer, change and elimination of real right, and the way to protect real right. The law of the location of things is not the only conflict principle to solve all real rights problems. For example, the property rights of goods, ships, planes and other means of transport are selected as exceptions to solve the property rights relationship.

19.1On July 8, 1999, the Panamanian "Fiberhome" belonging to Venezuelan Fiberhome Shipping Company set sail from Tianjin Xingang, China, for the destination port of Hong Kong. July 10, this round is owned by Panama guangjin overseas private management co., ltd.

The "Yangtze River Wheel" collided. Due to the collision, the engine room and living quarters of Lighthouse flooded and the stern sank. The hull between the starboard stern and the port side of the Yangtze River was injured. Since then, the Yangtze River has resumed its route to Singapore Port.

In 65438+February of the same year, Fiberhome learned that the Yangtze River had arrived at Qinhuangdao Port in China and filed a lawsuit with Tianjin Maritime Court. Tianjin Maritime Court accepted the case, but failed to find the relevant provisions of Panamanian law. After obtaining the consent of both parties, it applied the general principles of civil law and handled the case with reference to international practice.

Excuse me: 1) Which country's law should Tianjin Maritime Court apply? Why? 2) What is the legal basis for Tianjin Maritime Court to apply the general principles of civil law? A:

1) Panamanian laws apply. Because the Lighthouse and the Yangtze River in this case are both registered in Panama and both fly the Panamanian flag, according to the General Principles of the Civil Law of People's Republic of China (PRC) and international practice, the national flag law, that is, the laws of Panama, should be applied.

2)

The two shipowners operate in Venezuela and Singapore respectively. During the whole litigation process, neither party provided Panama's legal provisions on civil, maritime and commercial damages, and our courts failed to find out the laws of that country. In this case, with the consent of both parties, the court of our country stipulated in the Opinions of the Supreme People's Court on Several Issues Concerning the Implementation of the General Principles of the Civil Law of People's Republic of China (PRC) (Trial): "If it cannot be ascertained through the above channels, the laws of People's Republic of China (PRC) shall apply." Therefore, the general principles of civil law and international practices should be applied to deal with this case.

20.

1998 At the beginning of this year, British Fang Wei Company and Ningbo Urban Construction and Development Company planned to jointly build a comprehensive entertainment venue "Ningbo World" at the south gate of a park in Ningbo. The development company then requested to go to the UK to inspect the performance of the facilities invested by Fang Wei Company. The expenses can be paid in advance by Fang Wei Company and compensated after cooperation. Therefore, Fang Wei Company sent two invitations to the plaintiff on June 5438+0998165438+1October 56438+05 and June 5438+0999 65438+1October 6, promising that the plaintiff would bear the accommodation and transportation during his stay in the UK. After consultation, the two sides reached an agreement on February 5 1999 on the development company's going to Britain. Agreement: (1) The development company will send a five-member team headed by Wang.