Search

Objective: To look at the fintech regulatory policy and regulatory system in the Greater Bay Area through the lens of the Trilemma of Innovation doctrine in order to identify the applicability and extrapolation of existing legal models in the zone of accelerated economic and innovation development in Guangdong, Hong Kong and Macau.Methods: The article is based on the comparative legal research of the regulation regarding models, existing within the regulatory framework for fintech. For that matter we conduct a generalization, introducing the classification of methods and systems that, in our opinion, can be recognized as the Lego-like systems of instruments.Results: The research evaluates difficulties that may be faced by the participants within GBA on the way of legal harmonization regarding fintech. Special attention is paid to Hong Kong SAR, being one of the bestknown examples of successful fintech regulation, and to comparing fintech regulation in Mainland China and in SAR (Macau, in particular). The author states that the last amendments to the financial law of Macau SAR also add an element of uncertainty, even though they aim to develop the situation within the framework. The author compares a technocratic approach, according to which fintech regulation is completely national (created only for the domestic market and reflects its structure) and traditional approach to regulation, a part of which is the Trilemma of Innovation. The latter implies the possibility of over-national (international) standardization, including in the form of soft law, which may eliminate the difference in understanding the fintech characteristics, its concepts and scope. Besides, the author analyses the correlation between the concepts of financial regulatory system and financial system of fintech regulation, extrapolation of the existing regulatory framework to the developing market of innovative technological solutions and their various models. The author highlights the regulatory response method, changing during the fintech market evolution, and applied, as a rule, together with other approaches.Scientific novelty: the article presents a comprehensive review of the different systems of fintech legal regulation in the Guangdong – Hong Kong – Macau Greater Bay Area, whose unique experience demonstrates various trajectories of the fintech market development in southern China within the “One Country – Two Systems” concept.Practical significance: the main conclusions and proposals resulting from the study are of significant interest for further research, regulatory policy and fintech regulatory system, as Mainland China and the special administrative regions of the Greater Bay Area use different approaches and methods of legal response that have no analogues in the modern world.

This article examines international commercial arbitration, one of the most popular methods for the resolution of disputes that arise in the context of international commercial relations. The volume of trade between Russia and China has been gradually increasing in recent years, which testifies to the fact that the study of international commercial arbitration legal regulation in both nations is extremely relevant. The authors examine the concept of international commercial arbitration entities, as well as the sources of legal regulation that govern their establishment and operation in Russia and Mainland China. In addition, the procedures for case consideration, the elaboration of arbitration agreements, the rules for the creation of an arbitration commission, the requirements for arbitral awards and other aspects are investigated. The authors come to the conclusion that the regulations governing international commercial arbitration are similar in the two countries and are based on international law and national legal acts. Both Russia and China have adopted the norms outlined in the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL) Model Law into their legal systems although to different degrees. Both countries provide similar arbitration agreement norms and support the arbitration clause autonomy principle. The difference lies in the fact that China does not follow the competence-competence principle (the arbitrators’ power to determine their own competence to consider a certain dispute). Instead, the issue is referred either to the arbitration commission or to the state court for resolution. On the other hand, arbitrators in Russia have the right to determine their competence by themselves. According to Chinese law, a party requires arbitration court mediation in order to be able to submit a request for provisional protection measures to the state court, while under Russian law adirect request is allowed. In China, the norms for the recognition and enforcement of aforeign arbitration award by the court do not provide for the court’s ruling to be challenged; the refusal of the recognition and enforcement shall be possible only after the award has been considered by the Supreme People’s Court of the People’s Republic of China. In Russia, the legislation allows for both challenging and refusing the decision to recognize and enforce the award.

The article provides a comprehensive analysis of the interrelation of political and economic factors in Cross-Strait relations. The main political factor considered in the study is the policy of the ruling party in Taiwan towards the Mainland, its acceptance of Beijings One China policy and 1992 Consensus, put forward by Mainland China as a political basis for building Cross-Strait dialogue between the parties. Key economic factors include economic cooperation and exchanges between the two sides in such fields as bilateral trade, international capital flows and tourism. The relevance of the study refers to the settlement of the so-called Taiwan issue and the implementation of the complete reunification of the Peoples Republic of China that embodies one of the fundamental interests of Mainland China. The aim of the research is to examine the impact of political cycle in Taiwan on the economic cooperation between Beijing and Taipei, the further intensification of which could lead to the peaceful reunification through economic integration. The study provides a broad overview of the development of relations between Taiwan and Mainland China, focusing on the policies of the Taipei administrations from 1949 to 2019 and its impact on economic cooperation between the two sides. The methodological framework of the paper is mainly based on international political economy. The results of the research suggest that political cycle in Taiwan has almost no impact on Cross-Strait trade and investment. Meanwhile it has quite significant influence on Cross-Strait tourism, especially from the PRC, as it has the administrative means of regulation of the number of Mainland tourists wishing to visit Taiwan.