Journal of International Commercial Law and Technology Vol.4,Issue 1 (2009) Interpretation32 that judicial interpretation is of the same weight as to the legislation;on the other hand,there are no other supporting authorities,and,especially,there is no constitutional foundation for that.In fact,the PRC Constitution makes it very clear that the validity of the law can only be gained with the consent of the People's Congress33.Unfortunately,although there have been lots of debates regarding the validity and the legality of the judicial interpretations in litigation,there have been no clarification made by the authority so far(X.Wu,2004). Another controversial issue relating to judicial interpretation in China is the issue of"re-interpretation of the judicial interpretation"(Shan,2007),which,as seen,has caused some huge amount of debates in practice(X. Wu,2004).It basically refers to the situation where the PRC Supreme Court founds that it is necessary to clarify or revise some specific interpretations they made in the past by making new interpretations on the same or a similar issue.As one can imagine,with the unclear validity and effectiveness of the original judicial interpretation, the re-interpreted version will brings more complexity and confusion to the matter (Shan,2007).To push this matter to another level of debate,this paper holds a view that judicial interpretation in China prepared and promulgated by the Supreme Court is,in its natural fact,illegal,or at least,unlawful.The body makes the interpretation(the PRC Supreme Court)does not have the legal authority to do so under the constitution and the very instrument makes the legal effect of the judicial interpretation,the Rules of the Supreme People's Court on the Work of Judicial Interpretation,is in conflict with the PRC Constitution,therefore,it should not be seen as a valid rule. Unfortunately,none of these matters received any clarification from the lawmakers in the country.It has been nearly a decade since the UCL(1999)became effective.The way that PRC courts deal with the contract issues have not been consistent over the years,which have been criticized constantly and significantly (Zheng Xin,2008)but have not had any signs of possible amendments to date. 4 Conclusion As revealed above,as a unique figure in the international trading circle,China,Chinese law and legal system present a different picture to the Common law world,and therefore,it is challenging to utilise this system when conflict arises in trading with this nation.Moreover,as an essential piece of legislation with particular importance to trade,the PRC contract law,with its different approach in legal principles and ambiguity in many provisions adds more complexity to the matter. While convergence between China's contract law as written,embodied primarily in the UCL,and that of Western economic and legal systems has taken place,there remain variations in both coverage and emphasis (Matheson,2006).Moreover,it remains unclear how Chinese contract law on the books translated to the law which had been applied or enforced,that mainly because of the immaturity of the case recording system in the country.The multiplicity of judicial forums,the variation in abilities of judicial decision makers,and the predilection to resolve disputes by means other than litigation all add to the uncertainty in this area.In addition,as noted previously,although Westerners view contract formation/signing as the culmination of the process,this is just the beginning of the process for the Chinese.Similarly,the process of exploring these differences in approach that marks the current status of contracting in and with China is just beginning as well.(Matheson,2006). This actually leads to the very point of this paper,when doing business with China,in general,finding the law and understanding the law is important.However,because the way that Chinese laws are structured,it is not only hard to find the law but also difficult to understand them.Even when one can understand the law(doubt if it can ever happen to a non-Chinese,or even Chinese),sometimes,it is still hard to use the law in practice because of its famous ambiguous and framework/principle approach,and also because of the lack of a proper case notes supporting system.At the same time,for those who have been doing business in China for a while,would understand no doubts,there is a thing that people always use in solving problems,which is the so-called Guan-Xi (the connections)'.Guan-Xi can,in fact,makes the business in China prosperous or vanishing.Therefore,the last advice for utilising the PRC contract law system is,as mentioned at the beginning of this paper in the introduction part,to know the people who know what the laws are and how the laws work in their own ways. 2http://www.court.gov.cn/lawdata/explain/etc/200703230020.htm 3 Article 58Chapter 3 of PRC constitution states'the law-making power is held by the People's Congress and the Standing Committee of the People's Congress only.' 20Journal of International Commercial Law and Technology Vol. 4, Issue 1 (2009) 20 Interpretation32 that judicial interpretation is of the same weight as to the legislation; on the other hand, there are no other supporting authorities, and, especially, there is no constitutional foundation for that. In fact, the PRC Constitution makes it very clear that the validity of the law can only be gained with the consent of the People’s Congress33. Unfortunately, although there have been lots of debates regarding the validity and the legality of the judicial interpretations in litigation, there have been no clarification made by the authority so far (X. Wu, 2004). Another controversial issue relating to judicial interpretation in China is the issue of “re-interpretation of the judicial interpretation” (Shan, 2007), which, as seen, has caused some huge amount of debates in practice (X. Wu, 2004). It basically refers to the situation where the PRC Supreme Court founds that it is necessary to clarify or revise some specific interpretations they made in the past by making new interpretations on the same or a similar issue. As one can imagine, with the unclear validity and effectiveness of the original judicial interpretation, the re-interpreted version will brings more complexity and confusion to the matter (Shan, 2007). To push this matter to another level of debate, this paper holds a view that judicial interpretation in China prepared and promulgated by the Supreme Court is, in its natural fact, illegal, or at least, unlawful. The body makes the interpretation (the PRC Supreme Court) does not have the legal authority to do so under the constitution and the very instrument makes the legal effect of the judicial interpretation, the Rules of the Supreme People's Court on the Work of Judicial Interpretation, is in conflict with the PRC Constitution, therefore, it should not be seen as a valid rule. Unfortunately, none of these matters received any clarification from the lawmakers in the country. It has been nearly a decade since the UCL (1999) became effective. The way that PRC courts deal with the contract issues have not been consistent over the years, which have been criticized constantly and significantly (Zheng & Xin, 2008) but have not had any signs of possible amendments to date. 4 Conclusion As revealed above, as a unique figure in the international trading circle, China, Chinese law and legal system present a different picture to the Common law world, and therefore, it is challenging to utilise this system when conflict arises in trading with this nation. Moreover, as an essential piece of legislation with particular importance to trade, the PRC contract law, with its different approach in legal principles and ambiguity in many provisions adds more complexity to the matter. While convergence between China's contract law as written, embodied primarily in the UCL, and that of Western economic and legal systems has taken place, there remain variations in both coverage and emphasis (Matheson, 2006). Moreover, it remains unclear how Chinese contract law on the books translated to the law which had been applied or enforced, that mainly because of the immaturity of the case recording system in the country. The multiplicity of judicial forums, the variation in abilities of judicial decision makers, and the predilection to resolve disputes by means other than litigation all add to the uncertainty in this area. In addition, as noted previously, although Westerners view contract formation/signing as the culmination of the process, this is just the beginning of the process for the Chinese. Similarly, the process of exploring these differences in approach that marks the current status of contracting in and with China is just beginning as well.(Matheson, 2006). This actually leads to the very point of this paper, when doing business with China, in general, finding the law and understanding the law is important. However, because the way that Chinese laws are structured, it is not only hard to find the law but also difficult to understand them. Even when one can understand the law (doubt if it can ever happen to a non-Chinese, or even Chinese), sometimes, it is still hard to use the law in practice because of its famous ambiguous and framework/principle approach, and also because of the lack of a proper case notes supporting system. At the same time, for those who have been doing business in China for a while, would understand no doubts, there is a thing that people always use in solving problems, which is the so-called ‘Guan-Xi (the connections)’. Guan-Xi can, in fact, makes the business in China prosperous or vanishing. Therefore, the last advice for utilising the PRC contract law system is, as mentioned at the beginning of this paper in the introduction part, to know the people who know what the laws are and how the laws work in their own ways. 32 http://www.court.gov.cn/lawdata/explain/etc/200703230020.htm 33 Article 58, Chapter 3 of PRC constitution states ‘the law-making power is held by the People’s Congress and the Standing Committee of the People’s Congress only.’