Intere, it was probably done so that French law would govern the contract rather than Canadian law.
Well you could do that even if you signed it in China. Probably had to do with the other party to the contract being on the island and not being up for going anywhere to do any signing.
Well you could do that even if you signed it in China. Probably had to do with the other party to the contract being on the island and not being up for going anywhere to do any signing.
Choice of law isn't always that simple though. If they executed and made a payment under the contract in French territory it would certainly bolster any argument one might care to make from a conflict of laws standpoint that French Courts should have jurisdiction to adjudicate disputes, which is technically a separate question from governing law.
If one party was there and didn't want to leave the island, one would expect that you would just sign in counterparts. It's not that likely that there is some large commercial enterprise there, so there's a pretty good chance it was a contract with the French government and the French government insisted it be signed on French soil.
__________________
onetwo and threefour... Together no more. The end of an era. Let's rebuild...
Did I say that Britain was attempting to regain control of France so that they could claim it as their own, no.
Anyone with half a brain can tell that I am referring to the effort to expel the occupying forces and restore France to the control of the French. My apologies that you don't appear to fall in that group.
just a comment on what I thought was a poorly worded sentence
Choice of law isn't always that simple though. If they executed and made a payment under the contract in French territory it would certainly bolster any argument one might care to make from a conflict of laws standpoint that French Courts should have jurisdiction to adjudicate disputes, which is technically a separate question from governing law.
If one party was there and didn't want to leave the island, one would expect that you would just sign in counterparts. It's not that likely that there is some large commercial enterprise there, so there's a pretty good chance it was a contract with the French government and the French government insisted it be signed on French soil.
True, but the chances of a clear and unequivocal choice of law provision being altered are pretty slim. You're right though, doing it this way makes it pretty much impossible.
And the counterparts thing makes perfect sense, even after I wrote that before I thought 'you don't need to be holding hands when you sign it, so this makes no sense.'
why don't we just annex those biatches and turn them into Newfies, problem solved. ;-)
I can't believe it isn't a massive drain for France to try and maintain from thousands of miles away with marginal (if any) benefit. Outside of historical reasons, I can't see why France wouldn't be eager to cede control. If Britain can turn over control of Hong Kong, why can't France turn over 2 islands with a population less than Chestermere?
__________________
"The problem with any ideology is that it gives the answer before you look at the evidence."
—Bill Clinton
"The greatest obstacle to discovery is not ignorance--it is the illusion of knowledge."
—Daniel J. Boorstin, historian, former Librarian of Congress
"But the Senator, while insisting he was not intoxicated, could not explain his nudity"
—WKRP in Cincinatti
Sounds like a pretty interesting place to visit if just for the absurdity of it. Same reason I'd like to visit the Falkland Islands, I'm curious to understand the connection these people have to a country they've likely never visited but are nonetheless subjects of.
Sort of like how Canadians are subjects of the British Crown?
Sort of like how Canadians are subjects of the British Crown?
I suppose you have a point, but do many Canadians consider themselves British subjects? I don't think so. I'd be interested to see how people in a place like this answer that question. Do they consider themselves French? How influential is continental France on their culture etc?
Having grown up in Canada I obviously don't have those questions about Canada.
I can't believe it isn't a massive drain for France to try and maintain from thousands of miles away with marginal (if any) benefit. Outside of historical reasons, I can't see why France wouldn't be eager to cede control. If Britain can turn over control of Hong Kong, why can't France turn over 2 islands with a population less than Chestermere?
Probably for the very reason this dispute is occurring. Small island holdings like this are a means to claim seabed, fishing rights, resource rights etc.
I suppose you have a point, but do many Canadians consider themselves British subjects? I don't think so. I'd be interested to see how people in a place like this answer that question. Do they consider themselves French? How influential is continental France on their culture etc?
Having grown up in Canada I obviously don't have those questions about Canada.
I can tell you. They believe they are 100% French. Everything about the island is French...architecture, vehicles, language, food, culture, radio, television, material goods, entertainment, etc. etc. They are not a hybrid community straddling North America and France...they are French to the core. When you are there, you are in France.
I'm sure whatever millions they spend on the islands are an absolute and complete bargain to maintain a foothold - no matter how small - in North America.
Probably for the very reason this dispute is occurring. Small island holdings like this are a means to claim seabed, fishing rights, resource rights etc.
Yup, they're mining the crap outta New Caledonia these days.
