General Clauses and Practice: The Use of the Principle of Good Faith in the Decisions of Chinese Courts (original) (raw)
European Review of Private Law
The term 'good faith' or rather 'objective good faith' is the 'king clause' of People's Republic of China (PRC) law. This is also tied to the value system implied by the Chinese term chengshi xinyong (诚实信用). This article offers an analysis of the Chinese term and how the PRC courts utilize the principle, which is a neologism from the 1931 Republican Civil Code, much infl uenced by German and Japanese laws. The introduction of the term in 1931 was meant to strike a balance between modernity and traditional Chinese values (中学为体,西学为用) and 'good faith's' collective quality was considered instrumental to social justice. Socialist interpretation does not necessarily lead to particularly original solutions: The use of the notion of 'good faith' in a judicial context is consistent with the judicial practice in several countries belonging to a Western legal tradition. However, 'good faith' is often placed alongside traditional Chinese criteria such as 'reasonableness' (合理) and 'fairness' (公平), and as such 'good faith' is frequently used to achieve the end of 'justice' in specifi c cases, leading the author to conclude that the application of rules borrowed from Western legal cultures, in several cases, seemingly mirrored solutions developed within the Chinese tradition. Résumé: La notion de 'bonne foi', ou plutôt de 'bonne foi objective', est une notion clé du droit de la République Populaire de Chine (RPC). Cette notion s'inscrit dans le système de valeurs que recouvre le terme chinois 'chengshi xinyong' (诚实信用). Le présent article offre une analyse de cette notion de droit chinois et de la manière dont les cours de la RPC utilisent ce principe, un néologisme introduit en 1931 par le Code civil républicain et fortement infl uencé par les droits allemand et japonais.
Sign up for access to the world's latest research
checkGet notified about relevant papers
checkSave papers to use in your research
checkJoin the discussion with peers
checkTrack your impact
Related papers
2021
This article examines the intense debates over the New Criminal Code of Great Qing (Da-Qing xin xinglü) in the National Assembly (Zizheng yuan) during the Qing empire's New Policy Reform (1901-11). The focus is on the conflict between those who drafted and supported the new code and those who expressed reservations, especially over reform of the laws on filial piety and fornication. The issue of reconfiguring the family and social order through law was closely related to the overarching agenda of twentieth century legal reform in China-making an empire that "ruled through the principle of filial piety" into a modern nation-state that had direct relationships with its citizens. More importantly, an analysis of the late Qing debate over family law enables this article to problematize such concepts as "Chinese" and "Western" during this crucial moment of China's empire-to-nation transformation. It showcases the paradox of China's modern-era reforms-a contradiction between imposing Western-inspired order with a largely indigenous logic and maintaining existing sociopolitical order in the name of preserving national identity.
2017
The present collection of five critical essays is a companion volume to the republication of the rare 1812 Italian translation of the Da Qing lü li (Ta Tsing Leu Lee in the English original transliteration), the Qing ‘penal code’, which was first translated into English by the British Sinologue and East India Company employee George Thomas Staunton in 1810. Staunton’s text served as the basis for later European translations, including the Italian one. The digital reprint of the 1812 Italian edition is a publishing enterprise undertaken by EUT Edizioni Università di Trieste, the Trieste university press. Staunton’s translation and the later versions in other European languages can no longer be considered reliable tools for understanding Chinese imperial law, as demonstrated by specialized translation studies. All these translations nevertheless belong to a crucial phase of Western discourse on China’s institutions, law and civilization, which is the main reason for the present reprint and the accompanying critical essays. This volume is intended to encourage an interdisciplinary dialogue and to contribute to a better understanding of institutions and the law as central to the discourse on China in comparative law and in the history of ideas and cultural history. It tries to achieve this by assuming both a European and a Chinese perspective and moving from eighteenth-century perceptions and representations to the reform initiatives and theoretical discussions that continue to this day. The final result is hopefully an enhanced awareness of the extremely important role that Sino-Western encounters and comparisons have played, not only at a cultural level in global history over several centuries, but also in today’s global politics and economics in which we are coping daily with concrete, pressing issues of reciprocal understanding in our efforts to achieve an enduringly peaceful and fruitful coexistence. Contetnts: - Guido Abbattista, Chinese Law and Justice: George Thomas Staunton (1781‑1859) and the European Discourses on China in the Eighteenth and Nineteenth Centuries - Li Xiuqing, Nineteenth-Century Western Perspectives on Chinese Justice: An Analysis of The Chinese Repository (1832-1851) and The China Review (1872-1901) - Zhang Lihong and Dong Neng, The Great Qing Code in Comparative and Historical Perspective - Marina Timoteo, Of Old and New Codes: Chinese Law in the Mirror of Western Laws - Giulia Iannuzzi, The Cruel Imagination: Oriental Tortures from a Future Past in Albert Robida’s Illustrations for La Guerre infernale (1908)
In Michael Ng and Yun Zhao, eds., Chinese Legal Reform and the Global Legal Order: Adoption and Adaption (forthcoming, Cambridge University Press) Abstract: Over the past century, China has undertaken a series of legal reforms in order to establish a “modern” legal system. Despite the efforts of several generations of reformers, many commentators and scholars continue to find the Chinese legal system lacking in what they consider indispensable to a modern legal system or modern rule of law. They have often attributed this unsatisfactory outcome of China’s century-long legal transformation to incommensurability between Chinese tradition and modern values and institutions as represented by those of the industrialized Western countries since the nineteenth century. Underlying this view is a widespread assumption that there exist natural boundaries between “traditional” and “modern” law and between Chinese and Western law. To better understand the history of Chinese legal modernity, this essay argues that it is important to examine the question of how and why the Chinese legal system was labelled as traditional (and hence presumably incompatible with modern or Western law) in the first place. As the first stage of China’s efforts to restructure its legal institutions after Western models (often through Japanese interlocutors), the late Qing legal reform of 1902-11 provides a valuable example of how Chinese law was turned into the traditional, inferior other of both Western and modern law. To understand the relevant processes and implications, we need to explore at least three questions: (1) How was Chinese law Orientalized or self-Orientalized and made incompatible with modern law? (2) How did the Chinese negotiate with the Euroamericentric notions of tradition and modernity? (3) How did the late Qing legal reform project contest or contribute to the traditionalization (chuantong hua) of Chinese law? By reexamining the changing sentiments and debates among the late Qing literati and officials during the last four decades of the Qing including the New Policy period of 1902-1911, this essay shows that the traditionalization of indigenous Chinese legal culture was both a cause and product of the legal reform movement over the past century. It also calls for more attention to the frequently overlooked symbolic epistemic violence that accompanied the Euroamericentric discourses of modern law and civilization and conditioned the Chinese legal reforms in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. I believe that instead of debating whether China has succeeded in “modernizing” its legal system, it would be more fruitful to understand the historical specificities and complexities of Chinese experiences and to problematize the normative assumptions of the dominant discourse of legal modernity. I first trace how the dominant narrative of modern law came to affect late Qing understanding of Chinese and Western law and culture in the 1870s through the 1890s. Next, I re-examine debates in the Qing legal reform of 1902-11 to analyze how a Chinese legal tradition was constructed in contradistinction to Western or modern law. I offer some brief observations in the last section. Besides studying the issues mentioned earlier, this essay illustrates how real or constructed differences between Chinese and Western law were represented, politicized and institutionalized through the discourse of legal reform and modernity in the Sino-foreign contact zones during the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries.
The ‘ Dual Track ’ of Legality , and the Search for the ‘ Spirit of Law ’ in Traditional China
2016
China, with its millenarian empire ranging from the first Qin dynasty (221-206 BCE) to the threshold of last century (1911), has known one of the longest-lived and mighty politicalinstitutional structures ever existed. However, according to a still widespread opinion, China has not experienced a development of the idea (and ideal) of ‘law,’ that is to say a ‘legal tradition’ comparable to the Western one. In the face of differences, especially cultural and political, as striking between East and West, this article analyzes the concept of right and draw a comparison with Western law, to observer the peculiarities of an eastern view on the subject. Key-words: China. Law. Law Theory. Resumo: A China, com seu império milenar que vai desde a Primeira Dinastia Qin (221-206 a.C.) até o limiar do século passado (1911), tem conhecido uma das estruturas institucionais políticas de vida mais longa e ponderosa que já existiram. No entanto, de acordo com a opinião generalizada, ainda existente, ...
Loading Preview
Sorry, preview is currently unavailable. You can download the paper by clicking the button above.