| Project/Area Number |
12620036
|
|---|
| Research Category |
Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research (C)
|
| Allocation Type | Single-year Grants |
|---|
| Section | 一般 |
|---|
| Research Field |
International law
|
|---|
| Research Institution | Osaka University |
|---|
Principal Investigator |
NOMURA Yoshiaki Osaka University, Osaka School of International Public Policy, Professor, 大学院・国際公共政策研究科, 教授 (20144420)
|
|---|
| Project Period (FY) |
2000 – 2003
|
| Project Status |
Completed (Fiscal Year 2003)
|
| Budget Amount *help |
¥2,500,000 (Direct Cost: ¥2,500,000)
Fiscal Year 2003: ¥500,000 (Direct Cost: ¥500,000)
Fiscal Year 2002: ¥500,000 (Direct Cost: ¥500,000)
Fiscal Year 2001: ¥600,000 (Direct Cost: ¥600,000)
Fiscal Year 2000: ¥900,000 (Direct Cost: ¥900,000)
|
|---|
| Keywords | International Finance / Globalization / Securitization / Conflict of Law / Foreign Assets / International Probate / Absolute or International Mandatory Rules / Piercing the Corporate Veil / 国際金融取引 / 国際契約 / 国際的社債発行 / 相対的強行法規 / 公序 / 法規からのアプローチ / 取引法 / 規則法 / 承認原則 / 遺産 / 銀行預金 / 規制法 / 規律管轄 / 本国法 / 消費者保護 / 電子取引 / インターネット / 経済統合 / ネッティング / 法改革 |
|---|
| Research Abstract |
This study is indented for designing new legal rules and principles which are better suited for the realty of global finance.
1. To a limited degree, Japanese regulatory rules concerning finance has adopted the principle of law of origin and the principle of recognition, but not so clearly. The existence of these principles should be widely acknowledged and they should be adopted as such in the regulatory regime.
2. It is submitted that many present and potential problems of global finance may be dealt with by Japanese courts with by the traditional rules of conflict-of-law. However, requirement of predictability by players, i.e., parties and architects of financial transactions asks for clearer, more reasonable and more detailed rules of conflicts. One of the proposals of this study calls for a new rule of conflict-of-law that adopts the principle of the law of creditors or originations of securitization of receivables.
3. It is argued by recent writers that many instances of application of regulation can be explained by the absolute or international mandatory rules approach contrasted with the traditional choice-of-law approach. This study, while acknowledging the utility of the former approach, casts doubts on the assertion that the traditional approach must give way to the former whenever a mandatory rule is applicable as "public law."
|
