1. 职业教育法修订草案公开征求意见

2019年12月5日，教育部发布《中华人民共和国职业教育法修订草案（征求意见稿）》，征求意见截止日期为2020年1月5日。

征求意见稿对以下四项内容作了特别说明：（一）关于技工学校特别是技师学院的法律地位。目前，技工学校已纳入中等职业学校管理，此次修订根据《实施方案》，增加符合条件的技师学院经审批，可以设置为职业高等学校的表述。（二）关于是否保留初等职业学校教育。为保持义务教育的统一性，取消初等职业学校教育（实践中全国仅有职业初中15所，且已统计入义务教育学校，可以作为义务教育的特殊类型），删除了原法中关于初等职业学校教育的表述。（三）关于采用职业高等学校的概念。为落实类型教育的定位，用职业高等学校的概念替代高等职业学校概念。职业高等学校对应于普通高等学校，包括专科、本科层次。（四）关于职业教育等级。将职业教育分为初级、中级、高级三级，为将来推动职业教育体系对接国家资历框架奠定法律基础。

SPC Releases Judicial Interpretation on Trial of Administrative Agreement Cases

On December 10, 2019, the Supreme People’s Court (SPC) released the Provisions of the Supreme People’s Court on Several Issues concerning the Trial of Administrative Agreement Cases, effective from January 1, 2020.

The Interpretation mainly includes the following contents: (1) Defining the concept and scope of the administrative agreement. Among others, the transfer agreements for such state-owned natural resources use rights as the mining right, the government-subsidized affordable housing lease, sale, or other agreements, and the PPP agreements concluded under the provisions of judicial interpretations are administrative agreements. (2) Explicating the qualified subjects of lawsuits involving administrative agreements. The interested party qualified as a plaintiff in the administrative agreement is not restricted to the principle of privity of civil contract. (3) Adhering to the principle of comprehensive jurisdiction. The administrative agreement litigation includes both the litigation against the administrative action of administrative agencies in exercising their administrative priority and beneficiary rights, and the litigation against the breach of agreement by administrative agencies for failing to perform their obligations according to the law or under the agreement. (4) Insisting on the legality review of the exercise of the administrative priority and beneficiary rights by administrative agencies. The legal review is designed to ensure the implementation of the principle that "no administrative action may be taken without being authorized by the law." (5) Clarifying the circumstances of nullity, validity to be determined, revocation, rescission of an administrative agreement. In particular, the people's court may apply civil legislation to confirm that the administrative agreement is invalid. (6) Adhering to the principle of full compensation for administrative agreements. The payment judgment, liability for breach of contract, and transformation of litigation types are stated. (7) Standardizing the enforcement of administrative agreement cases. Given the orientation of an administrative agreement litigation as a complaint lodged by a citizen, a legal person, or other organization against administrative agencies, where the administrative agency considers that the administrative counterpart does not perform the administrative agreement in accordance with the law or the agreement, it may apply to the people’s court for enforcement in accordance with the administrative litigation law and administrative compulsion law.

Interpretation No. 18 [2019] of the SPC Released

Lately, the Supreme People’s Court (SPC) and the Supreme People’s Procuratorate (SPP) jointly issued the Official Reply on Whether the Pre-litigation Public Announcement Procedures Should be Performed for a Civil Public Interest Litigation Incidental to Criminal Proceedings Filed by a People's Procuratorate, effective from December 6, 2019.

At the request of some higher people’s courts and provincial people’s procuratorates for instruction, the Official Reply reads:  “A people's procuratorate shall perform the pre-litigation public announcement procedures for a civil public interest litigation incidental to criminal proceedings it files. If it fails to perform the pre-litigation public announcement procedures, the people's court shall offer interpretation and notify the people's procuratorate of making an announcement first and then filing a lawsuit. Where the performance of the pre-litigation announcement procedures by the people's procuratorate may affect the time limit for trying the relevant criminal case, the people's procuratorate may bring a civil public interest lawsuit separately.

Guidelines for MOM Products of Securities and Futures Business Institutions (for Trial Implementation) Issued

On December 6, 2019, the China Securities Regulatory Commission (CSRC) issued the Guidelines for Manager of Managers (MOM) Products of Securities and Futures Business Institutions (for Trial Implementation), effective from the date of issuance.

According to the Guidelines, the first is to clarify the definition and operation mode of the MOM products, which should meet the following two characteristics: two or more qualified investment consultants are entrusted to provide investment advice on part or all of assets; and assets are divided into two or more asset units and a separate securities and futures account is opened for each asset unit. The second is to define the responsibilities of participants. To be specific, managers should perform their fiduciary duties as legal managers, while investment consultants should offer investment advice and other services by legal means. The third is to require managers and investment consultants have corresponding competence. The fourth is to regulate the investment operation of products by requiring managers to establish and improve the investment consulting management system and strengthen information disclosure. The fifth is to enhance the prevention of conflicts of interest as well as the risk management and control. Managers and investment consultants are required to tighten the management and control of related-party transactions, fair transactions, and non-public information.

CBIRC Releases Detailed Rules for Implementation of the Regulation on Foreign-Funded Insurance Companies as Revised

Lately, the China Banking and Insurance Regulatory Commission (CBIRC) issued the Detailed Rules for the Implementation of the Regulation of the People’s Republic of China on the Administration of Foreign-Funded Insurance Companies as revised, in order to provide better legal safeguards for opening up of the insurance sector.

These revised Rules further implement the latest opening-up requirements for the insurance sector by loosening the restriction on the foreign shareholding ratio in a foreign-funded personal insurance company and raising the ratio to 51%, which reserves a legal space for the complete cancellation of the restriction on the foreign stake in due course in 2020. Pursuant to the Decision of the State Council to Amend the Regulation of the People's Republic of China on the Administration of Foreign-Funded Insurance Companies and the Regulation of the People's Republic of China on the Administration of Foreign-Funded Banks, these Rules relax the access conditions for a foreign-funded insurance company, instead of restrictions placed on such matters as “it has engaged in the insurance business for 30 years or more” and “it has been two years or more since the formation of its representative office within China.” In order to regulate the equity management of foreign-funded insurance companies, these revised Rules require them to have at least one insurance company in normal operation as the principal shareholders, and further clarify the responsibilities and obligations of principal shareholders to ensure sustainable and sound operation of the foreign-funded insurance companies. In terms of unifying the regulatory rules for Chinese-funded and foreign-funded companies, these Rules delete relevant provisions on the management of branch offices of foreign-funded insurance companies, and in this regard, the Administrative Measures for the Market Access of Branch Offices of Insurance Companies are equally applicable to both companies; and the qualification requirements of Chinese applicants to establish equity joint venture insurance companies are subject to the Measures for the Administration of the Equities of Insurance Companies so as to ensure the coordination and unification of relevant regulatory provisions.

As specified in the Measures, the principles of safety and reliability, overall planning, fair service, and standardized procedures should be followed for grid access for power supply and interconnection of power grids. The NEA is responsible for the supervision and administration as well as agency law enforcement of fair opening of national power grids, which should be carried out according to the law, and in compliance with the principles of openness, justness, and efficiency.

The Measures regulate five aspects as below: (1) Grid access for power supply: Power grid enterprises should provide access to power grids for power supply projects equally and without discrimination, and establish a work system for connecting the new power supply projects (including expansion and reconstruction) to power grids. (2) Interconnection of power grids: Power grid enterprises should provide power grid interconnection services in a fair and non-discriminatory manner. (3) Information disclosure: Power grid enterprises should disclose the relevant rules for grid access for power supply and power grid interconnection. (4) Regulatory Measures: Power grid enterprises should report such information on the fair opening of power grids as various power access, power grid interconnection and information disclosure to the NEA and its local offices on a quarterly basis. (5) Legal liability: In the case of violation of the Measures, power grid enterprises will be fined up to one million yuan, and power enterprises will be fined 500,000 yuan at the most.

Legislative Updates (11.29-12.5)

Legislative Updates (11.22-11.28)