摩彩国际真钱投注,淮北老虎机销售,平湖棋牌世界网址(中国)·官方网站

The Politics of Corporate Governance in Chinese Firms

admin — Tue, 20 Jul 2021 14:37:42 +0000

The Politics of Corporate Governance in Chinese Firms admin Tue, 07/20/2021 - 22:37

The Politics of Corporate Governance in Chinese Firms

Grant type

GRF

Principal investigator

Dr LIN Lauren Yu-Hsin

Others Co-investigator

Dr. CHEN Chao-Hung Christopher
(Singapore Management University)
Associate Prof. TSANG Dicky King Fung (Faculty of Law at The Chinese University of Hong Kong)
Prof. MILHAUPT Curtis
(Law, Stanford Law School)

Research Focus

The Politics of Corporate Governance in Chinese Firms

Themes

This project explores the implications of political influence on business with reference to the party-building reform in Chinese state-owned enterprises (SOEs) since 2016. By utilizing this exogenous event, we have the chance that rarely available in the past to examine the causal inference of political control over corporate governance and firm performance. In addition to SOEs, our project also examines the impact of party building reform to privately owned enterprises who voluntarily incorporated party organizations into their internal governance system. The research result will further the understanding of the extent to which and the channels through which the state intervenes in the business decision of Chinese firms and how political intervention impacts firm performance.

Contact

Phone: +(852)-3442-7672
Email: [email protected]

The Decision Making on Corporate Guarantee Cases in Chinese Courts

admin — Tue, 20 Jul 2021 14:37:41 +0000

The Decision Making on Corporate Guarantee Cases in Chinese Courts admin Tue, 07/20/2021 - 22:37

The Decision Making on Corporate Guarantee Cases in Chinese Courts

Grant type

GRF

Principal investigator

Dr LIN Lauren Yu-Hsin

Others Co-investigator

Dr. QU Zhen Charles
Prof. HUANG Robin Hui
(Faculty of Law, Chinese University of Hong Kong)
Prof. JIANG Daxing
(Peking University Law School)

Contact

Phone: +(852)-3442-7672
Email: [email protected]

Judicial Approach to Restricting Religious Freedom of Protestant House Churches in China

admin — Tue, 20 Jul 2021 14:37:40 +0000

Judicial Approach to Restricting Religious Freedom of Protestant House Churches in China admin Tue, 07/20/2021 - 22:37

Judicial Approach to Restricting Religious Freedom of Protestant House Churches in China

Grant type

GRF

Principal investigator

Dr WANG Shucheng Peter

Research Focus

This project seeks to explore the judicial approach to restricting the freedom of Protestant house churches from a socio-legal perspective, given that China has established a comprehensive legal system. Through a mix of analytical literature review, in-depth fieldwork in China (including interviews with church leaders, human rights lawyers, judges, etc., as well as contextual analysis of relevant judicial decisions), this project will produce and disseminate fundamental knowledge about the approach adopted by China’s courts to Protestant house churches in an illiberal context.

Contact

Phone: +(852)-3442-7388
Email: [email protected]

Improving Hong Kong’s Maritime Services: A critical assessment and optimisation of Admiralty Enforcement including ship arrest and limitation of liability procedure

admin — Tue, 20 Jul 2021 14:37:38 +0000

Improving Hong Kong’s Maritime Services: A critical assessment and optimisation of Admiralty Enforcement including ship arrest and limitation of liability procedure admin Tue, 07/20/2021 - 22:37

Improving Hong Kong’s Maritime Services: A critical assessment and optimisation of Admiralty Enforcement including ship arrest and limitation of liability procedure

Grant type

GRF

Principal investigator

Prof TSIMPLIS Michael

Research Focus

Hong Kong is the 4th largest ship register in tonnage and the 8th largest container port in the world (UNCTAD, 2020). Equipped with an efficient and mature ship arrest system available through, the action in rem, under the Admiralty jurisdiction of the Court of First Instance, it is also an important forum for claimants to obtain financial security for claims against shipowners through ship arrest. However only certain claims are entitled to an action in rem. Mortgage, collision damage, loss of life and personal injury, crew wages, cargo damage, and provisions and services to the ship claims are amongst the claims entitled to an action in rem. Arresting the ship prohibits the shipowner from using it until security is provided. For each claim only one ship can be arrested thus the claimant must decide when and where it will apply for ship arrest taking into account the efficiency and the procedural requirements for arrest at the various ports of call. Ports offering advantages to claimants take the lion’s share in ship arrests. Preliminary research in the Hong Kong’s Admiralty register has revealed that the number of the admiralty in rem claims has been reducing over time (Figure 1). It is unknown whether this reduction concerns all types of claims entitled to ship arrest and whether it expresses a general decline in Admiralty enforcement or is constrained to Hong Kong. The project will distinguish between the various categories of in rem claims and examine whether they are all in decline, thus answering the first question. The project will further research the reasons for the decline in admiralty proceedings by considering three potential factors. First, by taking into account the changes in the underlying financial, commercial and maritime safety parameters which affect the number of maritime claims and which may affect the number of in rem proceedings. Second, by undertaking a comparative analysis of the arrest system of Hong Kong with that of its regional competitors, namely Singapore and the Guangzhou Maritime Court. Third by examining how the provision of alternative security in the form of the establishment of a limitation of liability fund and also within the context of alternative dispute resolution, in particular arbitration, has affected ship arrest. The aim is to evaluate the current strengths of Hong Kong in balancing the interests of creditors and shipowners and suggest improvements to the legal maritime services including ship arrest.

Themes

Contact

Phone: +(852)-3442-9133
Email: [email protected]

Corporate Compliance and Big Data Governance: China’s Corporate Social Credit System

admin — Tue, 20 Jul 2021 14:37:37 +0000

Corporate Compliance and Big Data Governance: China’s Corporate Social Credit System admin Tue, 07/20/2021 - 22:37

Corporate Compliance and Big Data Governance: China’s Corporate Social Credit System

Grant type

GRF

Principal investigator

Dr LIN Lauren Yu-Hsin

Research Focus

China’s corporate social credit system (CSCS) is a big data project aimed at evaluating the “trustworthiness” of all business entities registered in the country; it runs parallel to a similar evaluation system for individuals. However, the existing literature focuses on the individual social credit system, with much less attention paid to the corresponding system for corporations. The CSCS is linked to a system of rewards and punishments for compliant and non-compliant firms alike, and represents a futuristic strategy of automated screening to determine which enterprises are allowed market access and benefits. In addition to being a RegTech project that enabling the government to use big data to assess companies and personalize supervision accordingly, CSCS is also a corporate compliance programme, in which the party-state sets the criteria and establishes a collective enforcement scheme that increases the cost of non-compliance. It is, therefore, vital for all enterprises doing business in China to understand the design and operation of CSCS. In 2014, the State Council published the Planning Outline for the Construction of a Social Credit System (2014–2020), which set off a comprehensive guideline for the system and induced a “waterfall effect” of government agency involvement in the CSCS at descending levels of government. Overarching design features, such as reward and punishment systems and policies on data collection and storage, are established at the national level, with each provincial, city, and county government responsible for setting up a CSCS specific to its locality. In addition, a digitized evaluation system that generates a score for each locally registered enterprise will eventually be established locally throughout the country. Since local governments can establish their own assessment criteria that fit their local conditions, conducting a comparative study to understand the commonalities and differences among standards adopted by local governments is, therefore, a crucial first step to understanding the design characteristics of CSCS. Furthermore, to understand the operational aspect and practical implications of CSCS, this study will empirically investigate the distribution of scores and the determinants of CSCS by collecting scores published by provincial governments. This empirical study will explore what “trustworthiness” really means in China and provide insights into the potential effects of the CSCS on firm behavior and economic performance. The aim of this study is to further the understanding of CSCS, a developing social governance project, and its implications on corporate behavior modification and Chinese state capitalism.

Contact

Phone: +(852)-3442-7672
Email: [email protected]

Does the Gender of Judges Matter? An Empirical Study of Chinese Divorce Lawsuits involving Domestic Violence

admin — Tue, 20 Jul 2021 14:35:23 +0000

Does the Gender of Judges Matter? An Empirical Study of Chinese Divorce Lawsuits involving Domestic Violence admin Tue, 07/20/2021 - 22:35

Does the Gender of Judges Matter? An Empirical Study of Chinese Divorce Lawsuits involving Domestic Violence

Grant type

GRF

Principal investigator

Dr DING Chunyan

Research Focus

Domestic violence is a pressing socio-legal problem in China although the government promulgated with a high profile the Anti-Domestic Violence Law in December 2015 and the law adopts several measures (e.g., the mandatory reporting, the police caution, the writ of habeas corpus, and the shelters for victims) to fight against domestic violence and protect vulnerable victims. A sharp contrast to this is the Chinese judiciary shows great reluctance to grant divorce to abused spouses who are struggling to seek an exit from a violent martial relationship, as shown by both official and non-official surveys of divorce lawsuits involving domestic violence. The existing literature has uncovered a big gap between the law in books and the law in action regarding judicial grant of divorce to abused spouses and Chinese judges split over four major legal issues concerning the finding of domestic violence and the question of whether the finding of domestic violence is sufficient to show the breakdown of mutual affection between the spouses. Chinese divorce litigation involving domestic violence is a typical women’s issue because plaintiffs in 91 percent of such cases are female, and judges are exercising great judicial discretion based on their own attitude and values regarding the traditional patriarchal inclination and gender awareness. Although some local courts have been proposing for or experimenting on female-dominant family court to protect women’s interests in family litigation, it is unclear whether and how Chinese female judges are less influenced by the patriarchal inclination, have more gender awareness, and more likely to judge in favor of women litigants when exercising judicial discretion in divorce lawsuits involving domestic violence. Little empirical research has addressed the gender effects on judging in this typical women’s issue in China’s context. This project aims to fill the gap. By adopting the research methods of statistical analysis and experimental vignette study, this project will investigate three research issues: (1) Are Chinese female judges more likely to judge in favor of women litigants in divorce lawsuits involving domestic violence in terms of granting divorce and awarding compensation to female plaintiffs? (2) Do Chinese female judges judge differently from male colleges in deciding legal issues concerning the understanding of “domestic violence”, the probative value of evidence to prove domestic violence has occurred, the relevance of domestic violence to judicial reasoning in making decision on judicial grant of divorce, and the sufficiency of domestic violence to show the breakdown of mutual affection between the spouses? (3) Are the gender effects on judicial grant of divorce based on domestic violence influenced by other personal attributes of judges (e.g., the age range, marital status, trial experiences, grade of judge) and other characteristics of cases (e.g., the times of filing divorce action, the presence of child custody issue, the financial independence of victims)? This project will generate rich empirical findings on the gender effects on judging in divorce lawsuits involving domestic violence and provide socio-legal analysis of the gender-based differences regarding causal effects of the key factors that practically influence judicial decisions on granting divorce to abused spouses in China. It will provide evidence-based suggestions on the Chinese judicial reform proposal for female-dominant family court and offer the stakeholders (including the lawmakers, the judiciary, the police) insights on how to reasonably facilitate abused spouses to exit a violent marital relationship through litigation. As the first empirical research on gendered judging in Chinese civil proceedings, this project also contributes to the global discourse on the gender effects on judicial decision making.

Contact

Phone: +(852)-3442-7678
Email: [email protected]

To Litigate or Not To Litigate at the World Trade Organization? A Comparative Investigation of the Determinants of Dispute Initiation at the WTO

admin — Tue, 20 Jul 2021 07:31:02 +0000

To Litigate or Not To Litigate at the World Trade Organization? A Comparative Investigation of the Determinants of Dispute Initiation at the WTO admin Tue, 07/20/2021 - 15:31

To Litigate or Not To Litigate at the World Trade Organization? A Comparative Investigation of the Determinants of Dispute Initiation at the WTO

Grant type

GRF

Principal investigator

Prof CHAISSE Julien

Research Focus

The dispute settlement mechanism (DSM) adopted by the World Trade Organization (WTO) is rarely an effective tool of redressal. Driven by the profuse echoes of domestic producers and their aspirations to make a mark on and access foreign markets, States initiate trade disputes at the WTO. Much to their dismay, the majority of such disputes are not litigated, while the ones that are, are not litigated effectively. The project will examine the disputes initiated at the WTO as part of a larger universe consisting of potential cases that could have been pursued before the WTO but were never taken forward (“non-disputes”). The questions to consider herein are: what is the rationale behind the use of the WTO DSMs by States? How do States select which disputes to take to the WTO? What conditions stimulate the effective functioning of an international institution like the WTO? The project aims to adopt a neutral approach to overcome bias leading to methodological errors. The absence of a neutral approach in the past has led to incorrect inferences about sovereign interactions in international trade law, partial explanations of governments’ preferences vis-à-vis dispute initiation, and uninformed deliberations by stakeholders involved in the definition of the global trade policy agenda. Through comparative investigation, the research is conclusively able to analyse how the four key members of the WTO – China, the US, India, and the EU – choose to pursue WTO litigation by (1) constructing an original Global Trade Barriers Open Data Index (GTB-ODI) of the entire set of potential and actual WTO disputes concerning these WTO members in the 2010-2020 period and (2) assessing reasoning and explanations behind various hypotheses concerning governments’ decisions to initiate WTO disputes by adopting a sequential mixed method approach, which derives its roots from a combination of statistical analyses of the GTB-ODI and in-depth four case studies.

Contact

Phone: +(852)-3442-6594
Email: [email protected]