What are the legal consequences of the parties setting aside the dispute?

Basic meaning. The basic meaning of "shelving disputes and joint development" is: first, sovereignty belongs to me; Second, in the absence of a thorough settlement of territorial disputes, it is possible to put aside sovereignty and put the dispute on hold.

Shelving a dispute is not to give up sovereignty, but to put the dispute aside for a while; Third, joint development of some disputed territories; Fourth, the purpose of joint development is to enhance mutual understanding through cooperation and create conditions for the final and rational settlement of sovereignty.

Legal Basis and Practice.

Joint development has a basis in international law, most notably in article 74, paragraph 3, or article 83, paragraph 3, of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. Although the term "joint development" is not used in the above-mentioned provisions of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, it is clear that "provisional arrangement" includes "joint development" and that "joint development" is an important form of "provisional arrangement". At the same time, joint development through agreements has been adopted and developed by various countries, and practice has proved that it has strong vitality.

Since the 50s of the 20th century, as of 2012, there have been more than 20 internationally jointly developed practices, scattered all over the world; Joint development has become a practice worldwide, including two situations: first, the delimitation agreement provides for mutual benefit-sharing and the establishment of joint development zones; The second is to reach an agreement on joint development in the overlapping area before reaching a demarcation agreement. In addition, co-development has been recognized by the International Court of Justice. For example, the International Court of Justice, in the North Sea Continental Shelf case (1969), held that the delimitation of the continental shelf could be resolved by agreement or, if no agreement was reached, by equitable delimitation of overlapping areas, or by agreement on joint exploitation.

It can be seen that although there are differences in the concept of joint development in theory, there are many international practices of using the joint development system to develop resources, and there is no dilemma.

To answer this question, we must first borrow a famous quote from Winston Churchill: There are no eternal friends, no permanent enemies, only eternal interests.

The proposal of the policy of shelving disputes and joint development is mainly aimed at the issue of the ownership of Diaoyu Dao between China and Japan, and in fact, the two sides are more interested in the rich natural resources around Diaoyu Dao than the island itself.

Rather than the two sides staying at a stalemate and putting resources on hold, it is better to put the dispute aside and share the benefits of developing resources together. After all, in fact, both sides have a certain basis for arguing, and neither side has an overwhelming basis, and the argument may not be able to reach a conclusion in another hundred years.

The sovereignty belongs to me, and this proposal is based on greater considerations. Diaoyu Dao is of great military significance, and if we seize Diaoyu Dao, the scope of sea area control will be much larger, and it is an important sea area, and China's military mobility is stronger, so we must retain our sovereignty.

1. There are two typical cases on the issue of equitable liability in the Tort Liability Law: first, the real case, the "ashtray case" - an ashtray stoned a passer-by to death, but the infringer could not be determined, and the court finally ruled that all the residents of the first floor and the second floor of the building were liable; Second, the "cutting board case" - the cutting board fell from the sky and injured passers-by, and the court finally rejected the lawsuit, because the person responsible for the infringement was unknown and did not meet the conditions for prosecution 2. The situation is very complicated, and if you want to write an article, you can collect some judgments or cases, and there are many in practice.

3. The issue of revocation litigation in bankruptcy cases is also unclear in legislation, and there are many problems. What is the status of the manager, and so on.

The parties put aside the dispute, which should be called out-of-court mediation in law.

Vice General Qi's remarks sparked a wave of criticism in China, and many people thought that this was a weak remark and a kind of backwards. Is that really the case?

The so-called "the upper army is defeated and the scheming is served, the second is the enemy, the last is the army, and the last is the siege." So it's not wise to shout and kill. China's reiteration that shelving the dispute is a ploy that is much more clever than a sword-to-sword encounter.

First of all, there is a premise for this shelving of disputes, that is, sovereignty rests with me. In other words, if Japan wants to solve the problem through dialogue, it must recognize that the sovereignty of the Diaoyu Islands belongs to China. If Ri Hanchang himself really did this, wouldn't that be tantamount to admitting that he was a thief?

A man has already recognized himself as a thief, what else can he talk about with his master? Therefore, our aim is to induce Japan to recognize China's sovereignty. However, the Japanese were also shrewd and refused to approve of China's proposal, but this result made Japan more passive, while China won the wind of a great power.

Second, even if Japan recognizes that its sovereignty belongs to China, we will have to negotiate with him, and we will not lose anything. It's okay to talk, since the sovereignty is mine, what can you take advantage of? Moreover, we can talk slowly, the longer we talk, the better, and the longer we talk, the better it will be for us.

After all, China is on the rise, while Japan is going downhill, and what we want is time, and to win time to become stronger. We can say that the sovereignty is mine, and what are you qualified to talk to me about? Don't get out of here, or Lao Tzu will whip you!

Oh, little Japan.

All in all, we should be rationally patriotic. Think more about things to avoid misjudgments. The words of the family, hehe!