Internet jurisdiction and choice of law: Legal practices in the EU, US and China

Internet Jurisdiction and Choice of Law: Legal Practices in the EU, US and China

Volumn , Issue , 2010, Pages 1-261

  Wang, Faye Fangfei ^a  

^a BOURNEMOUTH UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84925175162     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.1017/CBO9780511762826     Document Type: Book

References (121)

1. Aciman, C. and Vo-Verde, D. (2002) “Refining the Zippo Test: New Trends on Personal Jurisdiction for Internet Activities”, Computer & Internet Law, 19: 16.
2. Berman, P. S. (2002) “The Globalization of Jurisdiction”, University of Pennsylvania Law Review, 151: 311.
3. Boone, B. D. (Spring 2006) “Bullseye!: Why a ‘Targeting’ Approach to Personal Jurisdiction in the E-commerce Context Makes Sense Internationally”, Emory International Law Review 20: 241.
4. Burnett, R. and Klinger, P. (2005) Drafting and Negotiating Computer Contracts (Sussex: Tottel Publishing, 2nd edn.).
5. Cachia, P. (2009) “Consumer Contracts in European Private International Law: The Sphere of Operation of the Consumer Contract Rules in the Brussels I and Rome I Regulations”, European Law Review, 34(3): 476.
6. Calliess, G. P. (2006) “Online Dispute Resolution: Consumer Redress in a Global Market Place”, German Law Journal, 7(8): 647.
7. Chen, C. (Spring 2004) “United States and European Union Approaches to Internet Jurisdiction and their Impact on E-Commerce”, University of Pennsylvania Journal of International Economic Law, 25: 423.
8. Chik, W. B. (Spring 2002) “U.S. Jurisdictional Rules of Adjudication Over Business Conducted Via the Internet – Guidelines and a Checklist for the E-Commerce Merchant”, Tulane Journal of International and Comparative Law, 10: 243.
9. Cunard, J.P. andCoplan, J.B. (2001) “Developments in Internet and E-Commerce Law” PLI/P, 678: 935.
10. Deveci, H. A. (2006) “Personal Jurisdiction: Where Cyberspace Meets the Real World – Part II”, Computer Law & Security Report 22: 39.
11. Dogauchi, M. and Hartley, T.C. (2004) “Hague Conference on Private International Law, Preliminary Draft Convention on Exclusive Choice of Court Agreements: Draft 6”, available at www.hcch.net/upload/wop/jdgm_pd25e.pdf (last visited on 23 March 2009).
12. Efroni, Z. (2002) “The Anti-cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act and the Uniform Dispute Resolution Policy: New Opportunities for International Forum Shopping?” Columbia Journal of Law & the Arts, 26: 335. 241
13. Fawcett, J. J., Harris, J. M. and Bridge, M. (2005) International Sale of Goods in the Conflict of Laws (New York: Oxford University Press, 2005).
14. Geist, M. (2001a) “Is There a There There? Toward Greater Certainty for Internet Jurisdiction”, PLI/PAT 661: 561, 575/Berkeley Tech. L.J. 16: 1345.
15. Geist, M. (2001b) Internet Law in Canada 69 (Canada: Captus Press, 2nd edn.).
16. Goode, R., Kronke, H., and McKendrick, E. (2007) Transnational Commercial Law: Text, Cases and Materials (Oxford University Press).
17. Hartley, T. and Dogauchi, M. (2007) “Explanatory Report on the 2005 Hague Choice of Court Agreements Convention”, HCCHPublication, available at www.hcch.net/upload/expl37e.pdf (last visited on 21 August 2009).
18. Herrmann, G.(2001) “SomeLegalE-flectionsonOnlineArbitration”, inBriner, R., Fortier, L., Berger, K. and Bredow, J. (eds.), Law of International Business and Dispute Settlement in the 21st Century (Cologne: CarlHeymanns Verlag KG) pp. 267–76.
19. Hill, J. (2005) International Commercial Disputes in English Courts (Oxford and Portland, OR: Hart Publishing, 3rd edn.).
20. Katsh, E. M. and Rifkin, J. (2001) Online Dispute Resolution: Resolving Conflicts in Cyberspace (San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass).
21. Kruger, T. (April 2006) “The 20th Session of the Hague Conference: A New Choice of Court Convention and the Issue of EC Membership”, International and Comparative Law Quarterly, 55: 447.
22. Lando, O. (1987) “The EEC Convention on the Law Applicable to Contractual Obligations”, Common Market Law Review, 24: 159.
23. Maloney, Mark M. (1993) “Specific Jurisdiction and the ‘Arise From or Relate To’ Requirement… What Does it Mean?” Wash. Lee L. Rev. 50: 1265.
24. Mazzotta, F.G. (Summer 2001) “A Guide to E-Commerce: Some Legal Issues Posed by E-Commerce for American Businesses Engaged in Domestic and International Transactions”, Suffolk Transnational Law Review 24: 249.
25. McClean, D. and Beevers, K. (2005) Morris – The Conflict of Laws (London: Sweet & Maxwell, 6th edn.).
26. McLachlan, C. (1990) “Splitting the Proper Law in Private International Law”, BYIL 61: 311.
27. Merrett, L. (2009) “Article 23 of the Brussels I Regulation: A Comprehensive Code for Jurisdiction Agreements?”, International and Comparative Law Quarterly 58: 545.
28. Moss, G. C. (2008) “Arbitration and Private International Law”, International Arbitration Law Review 11(4): 153.
29. Motion, P. (2005) “Article 17 ECD: Encouragement of Alternative Dispute Resolution On-line Dispute Resolution: A View From Scotland”, in Edwards, L. (ed.), The New Legal Framework for E-commerce in Europe (Oxford: Hart Publishing) pp. 137–69.
30. Nimmer, R. T. (2001) “Understanding Electronic Contracting: UCITA, E-Signature, Federal, State, and Foreign Regulations 2001”, PLI/PAT 649: 15.
31. Ponte, L. M. (2001) “Throwing Bad Money After Bad: Can Online Dispute Resolution (ODR) Really Deliver the Goods for the Unhappy Internet Shopper?” Tulane Journal of Technology and Intellectual Property 3: 55.
32. Rabinovich-Einy, O. (Spring 2006) “Technology's Impact: TheQuest for aNewParadigm for Accountability in Mediation”, Harvard Negotiation Law Review 11: 253.
33. Rabinovich-Einy, O. “Recent International Agreement: Private International Law – Civil Procedure – Hague Conference Approves Uniform Rules of Enforcement for International Forum Selection Clauses – Convention as Choice of Court Agreements, concluded June, 30, 2005” (January 2006) Harvard Law Review 119: 931, available at h/r.rubystudio.com/media/pdf/hague_conference.pdf.
34. Reese, W. L. M. and Green, R. S. (1953) “That Elusive Word, ‘Residence’”, Vanderbilt Law Review 6: 561.
35. Reidenberg, J. (2005) “Technology and Internet Jurisdiction”, 153 University of Pennsylvania Law Review 1951.
36. Rice, D. T. (Fall 2000) “Jurisdiction in Cyberspace: Which Law and Forum apply to Securities Transactions on the Internet?”, University of Pennsylvania Journal of International Economic Law 21: 585.
37. Rice, D. T. (2004) “Problems in Running a Global Internet Business: Complying with the Laws of Other Countries”, PLI/PAT 797: 11.
38. Rice, D. T. and Gladstone, J. (2003) “An Assessment of the Effects Test in Determining Personal Jurisdiction in Cyberspace”, Business Lawyer 58: 601.
39. Rosner, N. (2004) “International Jurisdiction in European Union E-Commerce Contracts”, in Kinsella, N.S. and Simpson, A.F. (eds.), Online Contract Formation (New York, NY: Oceana Publications, Inc.), p. 481.
40. Scoles, E. F., Hay, P., Borchers, P. J. and Symeonides, S. C. (2000) Conflict of Laws (St. Paul, MN: West Group, 3rd edn.).
41. Smith, G. J. H. (2002) Internet Law and Regulation (London: Sweet & Maxwell, 3rd edn.).
42. Spencer, B. (2006) “Jurisdiction and the Internet: Returning to Traditional Principles to Analyze Network-Mediated Contacts’, University of Illinois Law Review 71.
43. Stone, R. (2005) The Modern Law of Contract (London: Cavendish Publishing Limited, 6th edn.).
44. Sun, N. S. and Du, T. (eds.) (2006) Contemporary Private International Law Research: China and Private International Law in the 21st Century (Shanghai: Shanghai People Publishing).
45. Symeonides, S. C. (Fall 2006) “Choice of Law in the American Courts in 2006: Twentieth Annual Survey”, American Journal of Comparative Law, 54: 697.
46. Takahashi, K. (2002) “Jurisdiction in Matters relating to Contract: Article 5 (1) of the Brussels Convention and Regulation”, European Law Review 27(5): 530.
47. Tan, P. (2001) “E-comLegalGuideHongkong” (Baker&McKenzie) available at www. bakerinfo.com/apec/hongkong_main.htm (last visited on 6 February 2005).
48. Tao, J. (2005) Resolving Business Disputes in China, Asia Business Law Series (Netherlands: Kluwer Law International).
49. Traynor, M. and Pirri, L. (2002) “Personal Jurisdiction and the Internet: Emerging Trends and Future Directions”, PLI/Pat 712: 93.
50. Trooboff, P. D. (23 July 2001) “International Law: the Hague Conference”, The National Law Journal, available at www.cptech.org/ecom/jurisdiction/Covington.pdf (last visited on 17 August 2009).
51. Tu, G. (Spring 2007) “The Hague Choice of Court Convention: A Chinese Perspective”, American Journal of Comparative Law, 55: 347.
52. Tunkel, D. and York, S. (2000) E-commerce: A Guide to the Law of Electronic Business (London: Butterworths, 2nd edn.).
53. Wang, F. (April 2006) “Domain Names Management and Legal Protection”, International Journal of Information Management, 26(2): 116.
54. Wang, F. (2008) “Obstacles and Solutions to Internet Jurisdiction: A Comparative Analysis of the EU and US Laws”, Journal of International Commercial Law and Technology, 3(4): 233.
55. Wang, F. (2009) Online Dispute Resolution: Technology, Management and Legal Practice from an International Perspective (Oxford: Chandos Publishing, 2009).
56. Wei, C. K. and Suling, J. C. (2006) “United Nations Convention on the Use of Electronic Communications in International Contracts – A New Global Standard”, Singapore Academy of Law Journal, 18: 116.
57. Wilderspin, M. (2008) “The Rome I Regulation: Communitarisation and Modernisation of the Rome Convention”, ERA Forum 9: 259 (ERA: Academy of European Law).
58. Yeo, T. M. (2004) Choice of Law for Equitable Doctrines (New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 2004).
59. Zhang, M. (Winter 2006) “Choice of Law in Contracts: A Chinese Approach” Northwestern Journal of International Law and Business, 26: 289.
60. A European Initiative in Electronic Commerce, COM (97) 157 at I (7). Additional Procedures for On-line Arbitration (On-line Rules), Arbitration Court, the Czech Republic, available at www.arbcourt.cz/en_index.php?url= rady/en_rad_online_od_20040601.htm (last visited on 26 September 2009).
61. “Adoption of Two Commission Proposals is a Vital Step in Completing the European Law-Enforcement Area for Individuals and Firms” IP/05/1605, Brussels”, 15 December 2005.
62. Agenda of the Seventh Inter-American Specialized Conference on Private International Law, AG/RES. 2527 (XXXIX-O/09), adopted at the fourth plenary session, held on 4 June 2009, available at www.oas.org/dil/AG-RES_2527_XXXIXO- 09_eng.pdf (last visited on 20 September 2009).
63. American Arbitration Association, ICDR Online Protocol for Manufacturer/Supplier Disputes, American Arbitration Association, available at www.adr.org/icdr (last visited on 26 September 2009).
64. American Bar Association Recommendation adopted by the House of Delegates, 7–8 August 2006, that the American Bar Association urges the United States government promptly to sign, ratify and implement the Hague Convention on Choice of Court Agreements, available at abanet.org/intlaw/policy/investment/hcca0806.pdf (last visited on 19 August 2009).
65. American Bar Association, “Recommended Best Practices by Online Dispute Resolution Service Providers”, available at www.abanet.org/dispute/documents/BestPracticesFinal102802.pdf (last visited on 18 June 2009).
66. American Bar Association Task Force on E-Commerce and ADR, “Addressing Disputes in Electronic Commerce, Final Report and Recommendation”, available at www.abanet.org/dispute/documents/FinalReport102802.pdf (last visited on 29 July 2009).
67. Arbitration Fairness Act 2009, US, 111th Congress 1st session, H.R. 1020, 12 February 2009, available at www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=s111- 931 (last visited on 22 September 2009).
68. Arbitration Law of the People's Republic of China, adopted at the 8th session of the standing committee of the Eighth National People's Congress and promulgated on 31 August 1994, available at english.sohu.com/2004/07/78/article 220847885.shtml (last visited on 4 September 2009).
69. Arrangement between the Mainland and the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region on Reciprocal Recognition and Enforcement of the Decisions of Civil and Commercial Cases under Consensual Jurisdiction in 2008, No. 9 [2008] of the Supreme People's Court in the People's Republic of China, available at www.chinacourt.org/flwk/show.php?file_id=128128 (last visited on 16 August 2009).
70. Arrangement between the Mainland and the Macao Special Administrative Region on the Mutual Recognition and Enforcement of Civil and Commercial Judgments in 2006, No. 2 [2006] of the Supreme People's Court in the People's Republic of China, available at www.chinacourt.org/flwk/show.php?file_id= 128128 (last visited on 16 September 2009).
71. Brussels Convention on Jurisdiction and the Enforcement of Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters 1968 (consolidated version), OJ C 027, 26.01.1998 p. 1–27, europa.eu.int/eur-lex/lex/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do? uri=CELEX:41998A0126:EN:HTML (last visited on 13 November 2009).
72. China International Economic and Trade Arbitration Commission, Online Arbitration Rules, promulgated 8 January 2009, effective 1 May 2009.
73. Civil Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China, promulgated on 9 April 1991, available at en.chinacourt.org/public/detail.php?id=2694 (last visited on 27 August 2009).
74. Computer Information Network and Internet Security, Protection and Management Regulations, available at www.woodmedia.com/cinfolink/netregs. htm (last visited 31 August 2009).
75. Contract Law of the People's Republic of China, adopted and promulgated by the second session of the Ninth National People's Congress on 15 March 1999, available at cclaw.net/(last visited 27 August 2009).
76. Convention on the Law Applicable to Contractual Obligations (“The Rome Convention 1980”), latest consolidated version, OJ C 334/1, 30.12.2005.
77. Convention between Belgium and France on Jurisdiction and the Validity and Enforcement of Judgment Arbitration Awards and Authentic Instruments (Paris 1899).
78. Convention between Belgium and the Netherlands on Jurisdiction, Bankruptcy, and the Validity and Enforcement of Judgements, Arbitration Awards and Authentic Instruments (Brussels 1925).
79. Council Decision of 26 February 2009 on the signing on behalf of the European Community of the Convention on Choice of Court Agreements (2009/397/EC), OJ L 133/1, 29.5.2009.
80. Council Regulation (EC) No. 44/2001 of 22 December 2000 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters (“Brussels I Regulation”), OJ L 012, 16.01.2001, pp. 1–23, available at eur-lex. europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:32001R0044:EN:HTML (last visited on 16 September 2009).
81. Council Regulation (EC) No. 1791/2006 of 20 November 2006 adapting certain Regulations and Decisions in the fields of free movement of goods, freedom of movement of persons, company law, competition policy, agriculture (including veterinary and phytosanitary legislation), transport policy, taxation, statistics, energy, environment, cooperation in the fields of justice and home affairs, customs union, external relations, common foreign and security policy and institutions by reason of the accession of Bulgaria and Romania, OJ L363 20.12.2006.
82. Directive 2000/31/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 8 June 2000 on certain legal aspects of information society services, in particular electronic commerce, in the Internal Market, OJ L 178, 17.07.2000, pp. 1–16.
83. Directive 2008/52/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21May 2008 on certain aspects of mediation in civil and commercial matters, OJ L 136/5, 24.5.2008, available at eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ: L:2008:136:0003:0008:EN:PDF (last visited on 25 May 2009).
84. Draft Model Law for Choice of Law Rules for Consumer Contracts, November 2006, by Canada for CIDIP, available at www.oas.org/dil/esp/Choice_of_Law_Rules_for_Consumer_Contracts%20_nov_2006.pdf (last visited on 20 September 2009).
85. Draft Model Law of Jurisdiction for Consumer Contracts, October 2006, by Canada for CIDIP, available at www.oas.org/dil/esp/propuesta_canada_pc_ draft_model_law_on_jurisdiction.pdf (last visited on 20 September 2009).
86. Draft Model Rules for Electronic Arbitration of Cross-Border Consumer Claims, CIDIP VII, draft/borrador 15 August 2008, available at www.oas.org/dil/Legislative_Guidelines_for_Inter-American_Law_on_Availability_of_Consumer _Dispute_Resolution_Annex_B_United_States.pdf (last visited on 26 September 2009).
87. Draft of Proposal for a Model Law of Jurisdiction and Applicable Law for Consumer Contracts, by Canada for CIDIP VII, in May 2008, available at www.oas.org/dil/Draft_of_proposal_for_a_Model_Law_on_Jurisdiction_and_ Applicable_Law_for_Consumer_Contracts_Canada.pdf (last visited on 20 September 2009).
88. EuroISPA Position Paper “Green Paper on the Conversion of the Rome Convention into a Community Instrument: COM(2002)654”, September 2003, available at ec.europa.eu/justice_home/news/consulting_public/rome_i/doc/euroispa_en.pdf (last visited 25 August 2009).
89. Examination by the European Community of Existing Hague Conventions – Note drawn up by the Secretary General of the Hague Conference on Private International Law, p. 6, available at www.hcch.net/upload/wop/genaff_note-ec. pdf (last visited on 19 August 2009).
90. Explanatory Note on the 1980 United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods (CISG), p. 43, www.uncitral.org/pdf/english/texts/sales/cisg/CISG.pdf (last visited 24 August 2009).
91. “Feasibility Study of the Choice of Law in International Contracts: Report onWork Carried Out and Suggested Work Programme for the Development of a Future Instrument”, Note prepared by the Permanent Bureau, Preliminary Document No. 7 of March 2009, The Hague Conference on Private International Law, available at www.hcch.net/upload/wop/genaff2009pd07e.pdf (last visited on 30 September 2009). General Principles of Civil Law of the People's Republic of China, promulgated on 12 April 1986.
92. Giuliano–Lagarde Report, [1980] OJ C282/1, p. 17, available at www.rome-convention. org/instruments/i_rep_lagarde_en.htm (last visited on 23 August 2009).
93. Green Paper on the conversion of the Rome Convention of 1980 on the law applicable to contractual obligations into a Community instrument and its modernisation, COM (2002) 654 final, Brussels 14.1.2003, Commission of the European Communities, p. 25, available at eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/site/en/com/2002/com2002_0654en01.pdf (last visited on 25 August 2009).
94. Green Paper on the review of Council Regulation (EC) No. 44/2001 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters, COM(2009) 175 final, Brussels, 21.4.2009, Commission of the European Communities, available at www.ipex.eu/ipex/cms/home/Documents/doc_COM20090175FIN (last visited on 20 September 2009).
95. Hague Convention on Choice of Court Agreements, concluded 30 June 2005, available at hcch.net/index_en.php?act=conventions.text&cid=98 (last visited on 16 August 2009).
96. “ICC Comments on the European Commission's Green Paper on the conversion of the Rome Convention of 1980 on the law applicable to contractual obligations into a Community instrument and its modernization”, Department of Policy and Business Practices, Commission on Commercial Law and Practices, 3 October 2003 JA/ef, Document 373–33/8, p. 1, available at ec.europa.eu/justice_ home/news/consulting_public/rome_i/doc/international_chamber_commerce_en.pdf (last visited on 25 August 2009).
97. International Chamber of Commerce, «Incoterms 2000», available at www. iccwbo.org/incoterms/preambles/pdf/EXW.pdf (last visited 12 January 2009).
98. Law of the People's Republic of China on Electronic Signature, 28 August 2004, Eleventh Meeting of the Standing Committee of the Tenth National People's Congress of the People's Republic of China, available at www.law-bridge.net/english/LAW/20064/0221374918883.shtml (last visited on 28 September 2009).
99. Legislative Guidelines for Inter-American Law on Availability of Consumer Dispute Resolution and Redress for Consumers, available at www.oas.org/dil/CIDIPVII_documents_working_group_consumer_protection.htm (last visited on 26 September 2009).
100. New York Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards, 1958, status, available at www.uncitral.org/uncitral/en/uncitral_texts/arbitration/NYConvention_status.html (last visited on 19 June 2009).
101. Online Arbitration Rules, 2009, China International Economic and Trade Arbitration Commission (CIETAC).
102. Organic Law of the People's Courts, promulgated by the National People's Congress in 1979.
103. Proposal for a Council Regulation (EC) on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters (COM 1999/348, 99/0154), on 14 July 1999, available at eur_lex/europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do? uri=COM:1999:0348:FIN:EN:PDF (last visited on 12 January 2010).
104. Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on consumer rights, Commission of European Communities, Brussels, 8.10.2008, COM (2008) 614 final, 2008/0196 (COD), available at ec.europa.eu/consumers/rights/docs/COMM_PDF_COM_2008_0614_F_EN_PROPOSITION_DE_DIRECTIVE.pdf (last visited on 29 June 2009).
105. Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and the Council on the law applicable to contractual obligations (Rome I), Brussels, 15.12.2005, COM (2005) 650 final 2005/0261 (COD).
106. Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the law applicable to contractual obligation (Rome I), Council of the European Union, 13853/06, LIMITE, JUSTCIV 224, CODEC 1085, Brussels, 12 October 2006.
107. Provisional Regulations of the People's Republic of China Governing the Management of Computer Information Networks Hooked Up With International Networks, available at www.fas.org/irp/world/china/docs/internet_960201.htm (last visited on 31 August 2009).
108. Recommendation regarding the interpretation of article II(2) and article VII(1) of the Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards (New York, 1958), A/RES/61/33, 18 December 2006, available at www. uncitral.org/uncitral/en/uncitral_texts/arbitration/2006recommendation.html (last visited on 16 September 2009).
109. Regulation (EC) No. 593/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 June 2008 on the law applicable to contractual obligations (“Rome I Regulation”), OJ L 177, 4.7.2008, pp. 6–16, available at eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2008:177:0006:01:EN:HTML (last visited on 16 September 2009).
110. Report from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council and the European Economic and Social Committee on the application of Council Regulation (EC) No. 44/2001 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters, Brussels, 21.4.2009, COM(2009) 174 final, Commission of the European Communities, available at www.ipex.eu/ipex/cms/home/Documents/doc_COM20090174FIN (last visited on 16 September 2009).
111. Rules for CNNIC Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy, available at www. du.hkiac.org/cn/cne_rules_procedure.html (last visited on 25 May 2008).
112. “Study to Inform an Impact Assessment on the Ratification of the Hague Convention on Choice of Court Agreements by the European Community”, Directorate-General Justice, Freedom and Security, Final Report submitted by GMK on 7 December 2007, available at ec.europa.eu/dgs/justice_home/evaluation/docs/final_report_071207.pdf (last visited on 20 September 2009).
113. Supreme People's Court Opinions on Certain Questions on the Application of the Foreign Economic Contract Law 1987.
114. UN Convention on Contracts for the International Carriage of Goods Wholly or Partly by Sea (the “Rotterdam Rules”), 2 February 2009, A/RES/63/122, available at www.uncitral.org/pdf/english/workinggroups/wg_3/res122e.pdf (last visited on 16 September 2009).
115. UN Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods (CISG), 11 April 1980, UNCITRAL, available at www.uncitral.org/pdf/english/texts/sales/cisg/CISG.pdf (last visited on 30 September 2009).
116. UN Convention on the Use of Electronic Communications in International Contracts, 9 December 2005, A/RES/60/21, UNCITRAL, available at daccessdds. un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N05/488/80/PDF/N0548880.pdf?OpenElement (last visited on 30 September 2009).
117. UNCITRAL Model Law on Electronic Commerce, on the report of the Sixth Committee (A/51/628) 16 December 1996, available at www.lexmercatoria.org (last visited on 16 August 2009).
118. UNCITRAL Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration 1985, with amendments as adepted in 2006, A/RES/61/33, 18 December 2006, available at www.uncitral.org/uncitral/en/uncitral_texts/arbitration/1985Model_arbitration. html (last visited on 16 September 2009).
119. Uniform Computer Information Transactions Act (UCITA) with prefatory notes and comments, available at www.law.upenn.edu/bll/ulc/ucita/2002final. htm (last visited on 30 April 2009).
120. “US Signs Hague Choice of Courts Convention”, 22 January 2009, Opinio Juris, available at opiniojuris.org/2009/01/22/us-signs-hague-choice-of-courts-convention/(last visited on 16 August 2009).
121. WIPO eUDRP Initiative, available at www.wipo.int/export/sites/www/amc/en/docs/icann301208.pdf (last visited on 19 June 2009).