Legislation of industrial nations the regulator of relations in the mining and metallurgy sector(USA, Canada, UK, EU, France, Germany, China, SAR)
Legislation of industrial nations the regulator of relations in the mining and metallurgy sector
For identification of the regulation field of the subject relations group within the legal system of industrial nations it is essential to find out which system of law the national law of a country, which regulates relations in the economy sector of our interest, relates to.
The "system of law” category has several meanings in legal science. Under a narrow definition of the system of law it means the statutory power of a certain nation and terminologically it is referred to as the “national system of law”. According to A.Kh. Saidov1, it is not advisable to mix up "legal system" definition in its narrow meaning with that of "system of law". They are not the synonyms. The system of law is a structural and institutional definition, it identifies the interaction, relationship and structure of the branches of law, which is determined by objective and subjective factors. Legal framework is a wider definition. The legal frame definition unlike that of the body of laws, reflects not so much the internal consistency of the branches of law as the self-sufficiency of the legal frame as an independent social body.
Raymond Legeais concludes that the legal frame and the body of laws definitions of a certain nation are not identical. Whereas several legal systems may co-exist within a single nation while a single legal frame can be applied by several nations2.
Modern comparative studies use a legal family category to identify those groups of the legal systems which have similar law attributes and enable speaking of their relative unity. The legal family is understood as a more or less comprehensive group of national legal systems united by the similar history of formation, structure, sources, key branches and legal institutes, law enforcement, conceptual and categorical instruments of juridical science3.
For all national legal systems existing worldwide the books of comparative studies give the terms like world’s legal map, world’s juridical geography, community of the legal systems. The above terms cover the national legal systems which classification has not thus far been finalized.
For instance Rene David suggested an idea of trichotomy, i.e. the standing out of three legal families (Roman and Germanic, Anglo-Saxon and socialistic) joined by the religious and conventional systems as the remaining legal world, which embrace four fifth of the Globe4.
K.-G. Ebert approaches the theory of ethno-historical formation of legal systems as one of the possible “working patterns of distinguishing and codifying of the legal systems”. He emphasizes that according to the ethno-historical theory each legal system (legal environment) features the supremacy of this or that legal idea or legal order. So, with the Roman system it is represented by the French Code civil, with the German one by Zivilgesetzbuch (Civil Code) of 1897, with the English-American one by the Common Law, with the Far Eastern system by Confucian theory of law and etc5.
The Romanic and Germanic legal family covers most countries of Africa, Latin America, Middle East, Indonesia, Japan and continental Europe. Legal systems of nations of continental Europe are split into two groups based upon a number of specific attributes: Romanic and Germanic. The first group includes the legal systems of France, Italy, Spain, Belguim, Luxemburg and the Netherlands. The second group includes those of Germany, Austria, Switzerland and a number of other countries6.
As R. David and C. Jauffret-Spinosi put it the Romanic and Germanic legal family is “the first family we encounter with in contemporary world” and which stands out as a continuation of the Roman law, as a result of evolution of the same, although “by no means shall be deemed as a replica of the same“7. From the viewpoint of M.N. Marchenko the Romanic and Germanic legal family historically and genetically originates from the Roman law of Ancient Rome. The above primarily distinguishes this legal family from that of Anglo-Saxon and the other legal families existing in the modern World. This is exactly the main feature of the same8.
н.о. Marchenko comes to the point that the sources of law below are common for all legal systems within the Romanic and Germanic legal family: a) regulatory legal acts headed by Law; b) customs which form a system of norms, referred to as the common law; c) judicial practice, res judicata generally recognized as the sources of law which in many cases, nevertheless, are challenged in some countries (e.g. in Germany); d) international treaties; e) general principles of law; f) doctrines by means of which many principles of the Romanic and Germanic law have been elaborated9.
All countries of the Romanic and Germanic legal family acknowledge the public and private divisions of law as well as the distribution of the subject of law over the branches of law. Public law involves those branches and institutes which govern the status and operating procedures of governmental bodies and relations between an individual and the government, and the private law involves those which govern the relations between the individuals. One of the significant differences between the public and private law is that the latter is mostly codified whereas the former mainly consists of the constitutional and other statutes which do not show codification.
Contemporary western law doctrines which allege that the conventional public and private law division is losing its importance, refer to the branches where the norms of business law prevail as those within the economic law which fringes the public and private law10.
As for the place the mining law occupies within the legal systems of foreign countries, due to the lack of a clear division to the branches of law and control, as B.D. Klyukin observes, the foreign legal scholars themselves have often referred to the mining law as that within the area of the special civil law11.
With the Anglo-American legal family one should distinguish between the English and American law related to the former by origin.
The English law group along with England includes the Northern Ireland, Canada (except for Quebec), Australia, New Zealand as well as five former colonies of the British Empire (today 36 countries are the members of the Commonwealth).
The English law is specifically structured. Generally it does not recognize any division of law neither to private or public nor to civil or commercial12.
The second group is formed by the US law which is quite self-sufficient although it originates from the English Common Law.
V.S. Belykh highlights several peculiarities of the US legal system13. First, unlike the UK, the USA has its written constitution which contains the "Bill of Rights". And although the American Constitution is not so much juridical as political, social and ideological instrument, at the same time it offers legal basis for building and management of all governmental and socio-political institutes, it serves as a legal instrument which supports the US legal system and those of all 50 states.
Second, the trade relations in the USA are governed by various acts both of the federal and those of the states. Acts of the “federal” character is the next peculiarity of the US legal system, which make it different from that of the UK.
Third, the law books mention higher significance of legislation with the US legal system versus statutes and statutory rules and orders of the UK.
M.N. Marchenko also emphasizes the administrative rulemaking of the executive authority as a source of the American law which shows constantly increasing significance. Such line of activity of the federal administrative machinery is based upon the powers delegated by the lawmaking authorities to the executive ones. Practically, the administrative acts (imperatives, regulations, directives, instructions) enacted towards specification and detailing of laws, in many instances substitute them. This new law (Administrative Law) is of a semi-administrative and semi-judicial nature in common with its predecessor, the Law of Equity; however it has been elaborated and enforced by the bodies operating under the conventional courts.
With the system of common law as well as with the other legal families there has been a quite strict interaction and interdependency between it as the system of existing norms and institutes on one hand, and the sources of law which fill its content on the other hand. Amongst specific features and peculiarities of the Anglo-American family which have largely predetermined the nature and character of its sources, the national and foreign law books emphasize the following below14.
First, they point out that the common law by its nature and content is the "magisterial law”.
Second, attention is directed to the fact that the common law versus the other legal families, has a pronounced "casual” character (case law), being the system dominated by the " judge-made" law and entirely lacking or almost entirely lacking any “codified” law or rather the unified laws.
Third, an important peculiarity of the common law against that of Romanic and Germanic law and the other legal families is in the fact that in the course of its rise and development it has been just slightly influenced by the Roman Law.
Fourth, a peculiarity differential of the common law is the enhancing of the role and significance of law of actions versus those of law of substance.
Definition source of law as M.N. Marchenko mentions, which is used with Anglo-American law, has notably been congruent with its counterpart used with a number of other legal families and with the Romanic and Germanic legal system in particular15.
V.S. Belykh16 underlines the fact that legislation and res judicata have been recognized as the main juridical sources of contemporary English jurisprudence. Mid XX century onward, the UK has shown a significant rise of legislative acts (statutes) which govern the various aspects of the nation’s social life.
As I.Yu. Bogdanovskiy rightly puts it, the law of practice and the statutes have been so deeply interwoven with the English law that the increasing number of laws triggered the noticeable activization of just the law of practice. In its turn the case-judged law literally absorbs laws. According to the above author it is the court practice which determines their real proportion and gives preference to a law or a case17.
In view of publicity criterion all statutes are classified into two main groups: public and private. Public laws contain general norms repeatedly applied and intended for an unspecified set of people. Private statutes relate to certain individuals and legal entities and contain specific (individual) rules of conduct applied to those. I’m referring among other factors to setting or revoking of privileges to specific persons.
Subject to systematization methods the statutes are subdivided to those codified and uncodified. According to V.S. Belykh the above classification of statutes as applied to England, disagree with reality. One can hardly speak of the codified acts which offer integration of homogenous norms (rules)18.
Social relations are governed by numerous statutory rules and orders, issued by governmental agencies. Statutory rules and orders in England inter alia contain King’s (Queen’s) commands issued with the Privy Council as well as the enactments and directives of ministries, local governmental acts and non-governmental organizations. The above may be represented by officials of certain professional occupations. Such bodies (persons) are entitled to issue statutes by reference to commands contained in the statute or authorities directly delegated by the Parliament.
With due account for the legal status of the body the following types of the statutory rules and orders stand out: Executive, juridical and self-contained. Governmental rulemaking makes a significant part of executive legislation. Those are: regulations, orders, rules, directions, warrants, circulars, notices. No material difference between individual types of the governmental acts has been found. Most important governmental acts are executed as Royal commands issued with the Privy Council and as ministerial orders.
Referring to the comparative method we are to analyze the main principles of contemporary ore and coal legislation of some industrially advanced countries with a focus on the elements of public law-based and private law-based regulation of business activity. We are to examine the principles of mineral wealth property rights regulation; grounds of iron and coal resources rights origin; a ratio between the land-user rights and those of the subsoil user (entrepreneur); creation and activity of economic entities; legal regulation of property; taxation.
D.V. Vasilevskaya19 observes that in most countries the legislation which regulates subsoil use relations, is subdivided into two independent areas: legislation which regulates extraction of solid minerals and that regulating the oil and gas extraction procedure. The above differentiation was historically developed due to the fact that solid minerals mining had been started much earlier than that of hydrocarbons.
The legislation is further subdivided into that of mines and that of quarries, being the independent sub-branches of mining law. Such division of legislation attributable to mine-type or quarry-type mining business has been traditionally established in France, England, FRG and a number of other countries where the mines law and that of quarries stand out clearly.
Mining of radioactive minerals is separated out into a special branch of mining law. Regulation of their extraction is both singled out within the mining law and forms a specialized system of radioactive extraction and use management bodies.
Offshore minerals mining law has been also developed actively. Aside from the conventional branches of mining law, quite a number of statutes regulating geothermal sources has been developed. Mining law with most industrialized countries also regulates extraction of mineral water, peat, sapropels (putrid mud), sedimentary sodium salt, amber.
Fairly often the mining law by virtue of specificity of mining relations also regulates nationalization and privatization of mining businesses. Generally the nationalized businesses are regulated by public administration and their legal regime is determined by ministries dealing with mines, finances, foreign affairs, economy, planning and etc. Production and commercial business of the nationalized companies abides by the rules which regulate business activities of industrial and trade companies.
B.D. Klyukin draws a conclusion that today quite a number of conventional structural blocks and institutes have been formed along with establishing and improving of the new ones. Dispute on development options of mining law in industrialized mining countries is far from being over. Major problem is, just as in Russia, which course of mining relations regulation either liberal or severe state regulation, shall be chosen20.
Focal point in mining law: Who in this country may manage mineral resources or at least deposits of the most economically critical minerals? The point has been resolved differently in different countries with either of two results: either to the benefit of the owners of that land or to that of the state. Some countries chose a compromise between both results21.
In K.I. Naletov’s judgement a system where all conditions of subsurface use would be determined exclusively by the statutes as well as the regulation of the subsurface portion use exclusively by the contract between the parties (or by subsurface use permission from the governmental agency) is hardly possible in the present-day world. Essentially, each contemporary subsurface use system combines both lines and a difference is in predominance of one line over the other22.
If a government is primarily interested in profit earning either as royalties and tax payments and yet afterwards in development of environmental management then the public interest in terms of community interest is primarily interested in development of the area and yet afterwards indirectly in federal and local government’s tax receipts and other payments.
With a view to identify the bearer of public interests, i.e. a community whose rights and interests are affected by mining of mineral resources and their processing the classification below can be done: all citizens of the country; separate social (national) groups; residents of mining and processing areas. Foreign law books ordinarily use the terms «stakeholders» and «communities indigenous populations» or «local communities».
You should keep in mind that one and the same term in the legal systems of continental and common law are understood and construed differently. For instance in the USA the mining rental is not the rental but rather a subsurface use permit. Mining title as a mining proprietory right, is also ambiguous. For common law this phrase does not have a legal sense. Individually the term mining in this system of relations means just the extraction. For continental system terms ‘mining’ and ‘mines’ mean extraction of certain categories of mineral resources which are explored and recovered by the mining method. For common law countries the term ‘mining’ means an inseparable right for exploration and recovery whereas for continental law countries the term ‘mining exploration’ will mean the right for exploration.
With the continental system the government acts as a sovereign authoritarian body which grants the mining rights via an administrative procedure of law enforcement towards an individual. With the common law system a government would prefer to act as an equal party and rights are normally granted upon agreement.
Let’s review mining and steel industry legislation of industrialized countries of the Romanic and Germanic legal family.
France. Contemporary system of legal sources of France is based upon the Napoleonic Codes. The codes are generally recognized as outdated despite numerous amendments to those and that the country has entered the present-day stage of legal development with a great deal of legal acts which are beyond traditional codification.
The civil code of France (Code civil) is built upon an institutional system and is divided into three sections: Persons, belongings and obligations23. The present-day edition of the civil code consists of five books: Book one – persons, book two - property, book three - methods of acquisition of property, book four – collaterals, book five – provisions applied with Mayott. The significantly renewed and updated Code contains 2534 articles24.
The array of legal acts of France were normalized mainly through the codes developed as the sectorial collected books which included both legislative acts and bylaws. Some of the acts provide for a set of measures pertaining to two or several branches of law which regulate relations with the specific branches of industry, economy and culture.
As an instance of the comprehensive act we can mention the Commercial Code of France (Code de commerce) which includes both the rule of substantive law and procedural regulations. The commercial activity regulated by the Commercial Code of France of 2000 (art. L. 110-1) is understood both as various trading transactions made by business people and generally any other types of business activities performed by the participants of economic turn-round with intent to gain profit25.
In France the mining law is reckoned to those branches of law where the norms of both public and private law are deeply intertwined. Formation of the codified Mining laws of France was implemented in 1956 upon issuing of the Mining Code. It integrated all laws and bylaws related to the mining legislation and with every article it offered a reference to the respective law which a particular wording has been taken from26.
Mining Code of France as amended in 1995 regulates both the legal regime of mineral deposits and that of mining companies, procedure of acquisition and termination of rights for mining concessions, mining rentals and nationalized mining operations, relations pertaining to administrative supervision of the mining operations as well as the liability for infringement of mining law.
According to Jean Personne27 the mining law poses a special legislation which includes that on the rights in bowels of the earth as well as in the mineral wealth they contain including the property rights in those of the government and of the other parties to a legal relationship. Standing out as a self-sufficient branch of law the mining law has been deeply intertwined with civil, environmental and labor and as well as with administrative and criminal law within the scope of conservation of mineral resources. It has shown significantly increasing interfacing with the other branches of law such as financial or tax and land laws, maritime legislation in the context of continental shelf mineral wealth exploitation.
France has preserved a main principal of Napoleon Code where the central government is the owner of mineral wealth rather than that of land. Mineral wealth is separated from land. Mineral wealth may not be appropriated by an individual. However the government is entitled to grant a concession for subsurface management or a mining allotment with an ownership title. In France any reassignment of mining property may be performed upon the government’s consent.
The mining code covers and regulates just the relationship in the context of mineral wealth being in its natural condition rather than taken out to the surface. The extracted mineral wealth is privatized and regulated mainly by civil laws. All disputes are settled actionably. Pursuant to the civil legislation a land owner is to warrant the mining rights according to the subsurface use regulations28.
Mining Code of France proceeds from the fact that with most major mining areas the mineral deposits are owned by state. They are located within the state-owned land and managed by the state agencies including the State Council, Ministry of Mining Affairs, General Mining Council, Committee for Nuclear Energy, Coal Industry department of France, by specially assigned praefects and various advisory councils.
In France all types of mining law are subdivided into three categories: Mines (mineries), diggings and pits.
Mining business covers deposits which contain hard or black coal and other types of mineral fuel either in liquid or gaseous state, alum, sulfates, iron, cobalt, nickel, copper and other ferrous, non-ferrous and rare-earth metals, sulfur, radioactive elements, arsenic, antimony and bismuth.
Diggings mean peat mining and deposits of metallic minerals either open-worked or by means of downholes, galleries and etc.
Pits are considered as methods of mining of minerals for general economic applications (in building industry in particular). Such minerals are mostly represented by readily available materials like stone, clay, sand as well as fossil fertilizers.
In 1986 the government of France revised the national industrial policy. It resulted among other things into consolidation of Usinor and Sacilor steel companies. In 1995 Usinor-Sacilor was privatized within the framework of the French privatization program.
Noteworthy that in France aside from laws the system of regulatory legal acts includes the regulation acts (reglements) issued pursuant to Art. 37 of the Constitution of France on the issues “beyond the domain of law”, by executive-administrative bodies represented by the government, ministers as well as by the authorized agencies of various level administrations.
Ordinances (French: ordiances) which belong to the same source of law as set forth with Art. 38 of the Constitution of France, are issued by the government (council of ministers) upon permission of the Parliament “to implement measures upon ordinances, which are generally fall within the domain of law”, as well as upon the final statement of the State Council. According to M.N. Marchenko the ordinances are basically one of the types of delegated legislation which consists of special regulatory legal acts (in terms of their nature, approval procedure, legal force and etc.) applicable in virtually every country related to the Romanic and Germanic law29.
With the system of regulatory legal acts of France a special significance is attached to the governmental edicts/decrees in some instances accepted exclusively upon approval of the Constitutional Council, as well as to those of the President.
Aside from the Mining Code the French law offers the other acts which regulate relationship within the metal mining and steelmaking industries. The acts of legislative bodies are represented by statutes, edicts and ordinances.
Range of issues regulated by the regulatory acts is sufficiently wide and generally the subject matter under the regulation is contained in the title of a particular regulatory act.
From the above we can summarize. 1. The Civil Code and the commercial code of France virtually miss the articles dedicated to regulation of relationship in metal mining and making industries. 2. The mining code of France regulates relationship in the area of mineral resources extraction. Regulation of relationship in the area of mineral resource transporting, metallurgical processing and metal product sales is performed by the acts of legislative bodies which set main rules and norms of partners behavior, and by those of executive bodies which regulate special and quite narrow areas of metal mining and making relationship. 3. Civil and commercial codes of France prescribe the regulation rules for a particular spectrum of relationship.
Germany. Refers to countries with the dualistic system of private law. The main sources of civil law in Germany are: the German civil code (hereinafter GCC) adopted on August 18, 1896 (as revised and amended of September 1, 2007) and valid from January 1, 1900.30 German commercial code (hereinafter GComC) adopted on May 10, 1897 (as revised and amended of January 5, 2007) and valid from January 1, 190031. Towards GCC the GComC is a special act.
Along with the main codified acts (GCC. GcomC) the mining and other allied relationship are also regulated by some codes and statutes. Just so a special legislation offered by the Mining law of FRG of 1980 divides mineral resources into those opened for exploration and development and those under the land ownership32.
The legislation of FRG has traditionally adhered to the license and permit based system for granting of subsurface use rights. Subsurface use relationship regulation is fixed with the Constitution of FRG. So, under the Constitution of FRG the land and subsurface resources “for the purpose of socialization, may be transformed into public property or any other form of public business by the law which regulates type and extent of compensation” (art. 15)33.
Mining Law of FRG of 1980 also protects public interests in granting the subsoil use rights. However, the Mining law protects just those interests of which the safeguarding importance prevails over the expected benefit from mining of resources, so called “prevailing public interests”. Typically among numerous applicants a permit for subsoil use (Erlaubnis) is granted to that which has presented the best output plan.
The Mining law obligates the subsoil user to ensure the observance of public interests which include: reasonable and orderly exploration an extraction of mineral resources, keeping the mineral resources unharmed and an opportunity for exploration works in the areas already taken over for use.
According to the mining law a mining property right is created upon an exclusive privilege granted to the subsoil user, within which the latter takes over the resources and the right to pursue mining business.
According to the federal mining law the competence of FRG state government covers:
- adoption of legal acts within mining industry as well as within identification of extent and methods of subsoil user loss prevention upon termination or restriction of subsoil use to the benefit of public interests;
-examination of mining venture construction projects, construction supervision;
-granting of uranium and liquid and gaseous hydrocarbons rights.
Under the German mining legislation the government is the lawful owner of a mineral deposit. They may sign away exploration and mining to the interested persons.
Therefore the regulation in the area of mineral wealth classification is implemented by the lawmaker through changes made to a list of mineral resources kept in government property or transferred to the persons interested in their mining34.
Over the last decades a number of laws have been issued which have significantly affected the development of mining relationships. A special role is played by the Statute "On facilitation of coal mining rationalization” of June 29, 1963, which provides for forced cartelization of small coal mines. Statute “On the temporary regulation of the subsurface use right” dated June 24, 1964 is the main act of mining law, which regulates resources exploration and prospecting procedures and prohibits geological exploration without a special permit from the Mining Administration.
European Union (EU). Analyzing the metal mining and making policy in the framework of EU you should pay attention to the role the industry has played in European integration. So, in April 1951 the Paris treaty was signed which became effective from 1952 and established the European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC) which united coal, iron ore and steelmaking industries of six nations: Belgium, the Netherlands, Luxembourg, the FRG, France and Italy. The Treaty consists of a short preliminary statement which sets forward its reasons and objectives, and 100 articles integrated into four sections. They offer the content and goals of the common market creation (Section I), the system of ECSC institutions and their formation procedure (Section II), detail economic, social and financial basis of ECSC and conditions of pursuing the objectives set (Section III). The summary section defines the issues of reporting and control, arbitration, conditions of the treaty effectiveness35.
Concurrently with ECSC creation the European Law creation process has been launched and its principled foundations built up. ECSC becomes sort of a testing ground for integration construction. The community offers a framework for testing of many provisions and principles laid as the basis of European integration, reflected and fixed with the law36.
In 1955 in Messina the ECSC members expressed a common wish to create common Europe via “the developing of common institutes, gradual merging of national economies, creating of common market and successful coordination of social policy. Roman treaties on the European Economic Community (EEC) and the European Atomic Energy Council signed on March 25, 1957, embodied the policies agreed upon in Messina. ECSC was aimed at increased product quality at the earliest possible date; supplies of coal and steel on identical terms to the markets of Germany and France and the other countries the members of the community; joint development of exports to the non-member countries; improved living conditions of workers in these branches of industry. From now forth the issues have been solved within the European Union.
EEC treaty versus that of ECSC has significantly changed the Community status, has radically expanded its area of operation and exercising of its powers as well as the system of supervising and controlling of the integration process. The treaty sets the most important trends of the Community’s economic, social and legal development.
V.S. Lisin concludes that over decades in respect of ferrous metallurgy two principle concepts has competed for their influence on the economic policy of EU: free market development and controlled competition. However in practice a policy which can be called situational, was implemented. The actual policy represented a pragmatic compromise between the rival concepts37.
European steel industry annually manufactures approximately €90-100 billion worth of steel products. It directly employs over 250000 EU citizens and times more is employed with ancillary and steel consuming industries. Just civil engineering and automotive industry in Europe employs 200000 and 1.1 mln. people respectively. European steel industry in its modern status achieved after a lengthy period of restructuring and consolidation, from the viewpoint of its further development is primarily supported in terms of its respective R&D efforts. The R&D goal worded in the EU manifesto (European Steel Technologi Platform – Vision 2030)38, includes supporting and strengthening of global leadership despite the dynamic development of ferrous metallurgy in the other parts of the World especially in Asia.
Let’s review mining and steel industry legislation of industrialized countries of the Anglo-Saxon legal family.
England. Legislation and res judicata have been recognized as the main legal sources of the modern English world of law. Mid XX century onward, the UK has shown a significant rise of legislative acts (statutes) which regulate the various aspects of the nation’s social life. As I.Yu. Bogdanovskiy rightly puts it, the law of practice and the statutes have been so deeply interwoven with the English law that the increasing number of laws triggered the noticeable activization of just the law of practice. In its turn the case-judged law literally absorbs laws. According to the above author it is the court practice which determines their real proportion and gives preference to a law or a case39.
Legal literature mentions various criteria for classification of English laws (statutes)40. So subject to the legal force and respectively a place occupied with the system of English legal sources the statutes are divided into the constitutional and common ones. In England in the absence of a one whole text of Constitution for it works the following constitutional acts: Act on the Parliament of 1911, Act on the Ministers of the Crown of 1937 and 1964, Act on the people’s representation of 1969, Act on the local governments of 1972 and etc. All the other statutes, as V.S. Belykh emphasizes, relate to the category of the common acts41.
In view of publicity criterion all statutes are classified into two main groups: Public laws contain general norms repeatedly applied and intended for an unspecified set of people. Private statutes relate to certain individuals and legal entities and contain specific (individual) rules of conduct applied to those.
Subject to systematization methods the statutes are subdivided to those codified and uncodified. According to V.S. Belykh the above classification of statutes as applied to England, disagree with reality. One can hardly speak of the codified acts which offer integration of homogenous norms (rules)42.
Among the laws (statutes) which regulate the metal mining and making relationship the following ones worth mentioning…… .
According to the English common law the mineral wealth (mineral deposits) are recognized as parcels of land and an owner of the parcel is considered to be that of the depths and everything they contain “right down to the geocenter” (court case of 1843). However as early as with the case of 1567 it was determined that gold and silver became the ownership of the Crown.
The statutes of the last decades on oil, coal industry nationalization and atomic power did the same thing to oil, gas and coal ownership.
According to the English law the mineral resources are owned by the land owner (landlord). Statute of 1866 named “On the primary deposits” (Load Law Act of 1866). However significant changes occurred to the property rights due to the nationalization of coal industry in 1946 in England. In consequence of a number of reorganizations the National Coal Council has taken over title to all coal mines.
Along with special laws which regulate the metal mining and making relationship England has the working statutes which set the rules towards the individual issues pertaining to the metal mining and making sector of economy (for example the Company law of 2006 and etc.).
Canada. Canada is a member of the British Commonwealth. English common law is an important factor which affects the development of the British Commonwealth. English court cases are figured as foreign and out of the binding force. They have the force of persuasive authority of the case. Alien court cases are out of binding force on the territory of the country unless any otherwise special reservation is made in the national legislation.
Barry Barton writes that four different elements can be distinguished in the Mining Law of Canada: title, mining law, devolution of rights on mining companies and control. Thus and so there have evidently been several circumstances which affect the mining relationship. Meanwhile some authors refer to just the agreements on acquisition of income from subsoil use, others focus on exploration and financing and yet the others do on environmental management and the issues arising from the management of mining operations or non-renewal exploitation. The major issue has been the right in the subsurface resources and the relationship pertaining to their acquisition43.
As for the form of state structure Canada is a federated state. Canadian Federation consists of 10 provinces (Albert, British Columbia, Quebec, Manitoba, New Scotland, New Brunswick, Newfoundland, Ontario, Saskatchewan and Labrador) where each of those has their law-making bodies (the legislatures) and the control system. However in fact Canada is governed centrally and its provinces lack real opportunities to secure the autonomous development of their legal systems. It is caused by the historical peculiarities of the country44.
Mineral wealth ownership and rights in hydrocarbons on the public lands of Canada are with the governments of the provinces. According to the Constitutional Act of Canada of 1867 (as revised and amended) in 1930 the rights in the natural resources of Canada were assigned by the Crown to the provinces. Since over 75% of the territory of the country belong to the public lands which are under the cognizance of the provinces afterwards the principal law of Canada With article 109 and 117 had fixed the provinces’ ownership of solid mineral resources, coal, oil and natural gas45. If a parcel of land is alienated the government of the provinces reserves the ownership of mineral resources. This enables the provinces to regulate mining relationship and manage the resources independent of the federal government.
Pursuant to provisions of Chapter 1 Article 92 (items a and b) of the Constitutional Act of Canada of 1886 (as revised on April 17, 1982) the Provinces of Canada had been granted "the exclusive right of legislative control of a) exploration of nonrenewable natural resources on the territory of respective provinces; b) development, suspension and management of the nonrenewable natural resources… including their primary processing". The above rule does not cover the so-called territorial lands: 1) the lands within the borders of North-Western territory and Nunavut; 2) the lands which belong to the federal government of Canada. Subsoil use with these lands is regulated by the Territorial Lands Act of 1985 and the Canada Mining Regulations dated May 26, 1960. Subsoil use title is granted on a basis of licensing and administrative procedure for the purposes of prospecting and exploration of mineral resources and contractual basis of subsoil use for the purpose of minerals mining.
Minerals prospecting belongs to the licensable business activities. The corresponding license (prospector license) is required to obtain the exploration permission. However no special requirements for license acquisition are laid down by the Canada Mining Regulations.
Right in minerals exploration within a certain parcel of land is granted upon another permissive document (permit to prospect). The permit grants the exclusive right to its holder to pursue prospecting. Person to have received the permit to prospect is obliged to secure the conduct of exploration operations by depositing an amount they intend to spend. The Canada Mining Regulations prescribe different minimal expenditures for the periods with regard to the exploration zone. Devolution of exploration license rights and its sales are not permitted which is absolute since the document authorizes a certain type of activity. Transfer of the exploration permit within a certain territory to another person is allowed upon the consent of the subsurface management department. 36.4 of the Rules). Noteworthy, the Canadian mineral resources legislation (both federal and provincial) does not require any mandatory license details.
Quebec Mining Act of 1960 (last revision dated March 1, 1985) sticks to the concept of separate treatment of subsoil plot rights and those of land plots (art. 2), which moves it closer to the Romanic and Germanic legal system. The Quebec Mining Act features multiple subsoil use grant forms both license and permit-based types and those contract-based: Exploration license is called ‘prospector’s licence’; mining license – ‘development licence’; permit for exploration within a certain subsoil plot is called ‘exploration permit’; license for a sobsoil plot management is called ‘disposal licence’; mining concession is ‘mining concession’.
Just as the Federal legislation the Quebec Mining Act declares the subsoil rights being the proprietary rights regardless of the fact whether they arise from a contract or a license (art. 3). However it requires acquisition of the development licence as a precondition for granting of mining rights. It differs from the exploration license according to the federal legislation in the fact that, first, the license authorizes mining of mineral resources and second, it is granted to a person which already has the proprietary right in the subsoil plot. Consequently according to the Quebec legislation the licensable activities are both the subsoil exploration and mining46.
Canadian legislation proceeds from the leasehold nature of subsoil contracts. The Canada Mining Regulations use the term ’lease’ for rent (art. 61(1)) and state that the form of such lease is determined by the Minister and the specific lease period and terms are determined by the Mining Regulations and other legislation.
The Alberta province legislation grants the wide-range subsoil use regulation rights to the Governor-in-the-Council (appointed by the Queen of the UK). According to the Alberta Act ‘On mines and minerals’ (art. 5.1) the Governor is entitled to make bylaws related to resources exploration and mining; make additional contracts; define contract period and terms as well as the leaseholders rights and obligations. The Minister of environmental assets of Alberta is entitled to recall the development right should the latter, as it appears to him, challenges the public interests (8.1 «b»). The Minister of environmental assets authorizes the user’s surrender of the mineral deposit (or its part), forfeits the right in subsoil use if, as it appears to him, the further development of the deposit fails to procure public interests (8.1. «c»).
U.S.A. The US legal system is a part of the Anglo-Saxon legal family. It consists of the following parts: a) common law; b) equity law; c) statutory law; d) the United States Constitution which crowns the entire legal system of the country47.
Unlike the UK the written Constitution of the USA offers such a feature of the US legal system as the right of the United States Supreme Court to construe the wording of the Constitution as well as the right of the highest courts of the states to construe their own constitutions.
Trade relations in the USA are governed by various acts both the federal and those of the states. The US legislation offers priority of federal laws over those of the states. State legislations are the detailing and clarification tools of federal instructions. United States Congress as the supreme lawmaking body is entitled to adopt the legal acts which form the basis of mining regulation. It is also entitled to alienate private lands in favor of subsoil users, determine their costs and impose taxes in the area of subsoil use.
Mining legislation is fully operational just for the federal lands and just partially for the state lands other than privately owned. The subsoil use of private lands is regulated by the state legislation.
States form differently their land and mining legislations although most state laws on subsoil use are the replicas of the federal legal acts. USA is among few countries where a private owner may receive the owner title in mineral resources.
The Uniform Commercial code (UCC) occupies a special place in the system of the US legal acts. UCC is not a federal law of USA but rather a state law. One of the primary reasons is the fact that according to the US constitution the issuance of civil laws comes within the terms of reference of the states rather than federation (for comparison and analysis: Pursuant to art. 71 of the RF Constitution the civil legislation is exclusively under the competence of the Russian federation)48.
In USA the legislative acts are incorporated with the US Code which consists of 50 sections according to the branches of law, legal institute or type of activity. Most norms of the federal mining legislation is incorporated with section 30 of the US Code “Subsoil and mining of mineral resources", furthermore the norms which regulate mining relationship are included into the other sections of the US Code49.
Each section of the Code consists of the parts. So section 30 includes thirty two parts (for instance p. 21 "Labor safety in metal mining and mining industry").
Principle of mining freedom was envisaged with the first Mining Law of the United States of 1872 (1872 Mining Act) which said that mineral wealth "located within the lands owned by federation either explored or unexplored must be free and open for prospecting and acquisition”.
In USA the mining operations are based upon:
first, regulation of mining claims according to 1872 Mining Act;
Second, the mining rent established by 1920 Act “Mining Lease” (Mineral Leasing Act 1920) (today these lease contracts are built upon standard contracts which enable flexible management of lease relationship development by the government);
third, resources proprietary rights acquisition;
fourth, winning the bidding for coal mining and some other mineral resources.
According to the Mineral Leasing Act the federal government was granted a subsurface mineral right located under the federal lands which was later affirmed by decision of the US Supreme Court.
From 1947 the legislative control by the Mineral Leasing Act for Acquired Lands resolved to grant the land lease rights to mining companies along with those in minerals prospecting and development.
The Surface Resources Act issued in 1955 and the follow-up court cases confirmed the statement that the land owner does not have an absolute right in mineral resources within the land lot and may not dispose of it at his own discretion for the purposes rather than those for which they are applicable in their natural state.
Regulation of land relationship in the context of subsoil use is performed on a case-by-case basis subject to the type of mineral wealth.
In USA for the lands which belong neither to the federal government nor the state governments the exploration right belongs to the land owner or the holder. Currently the development policy of the US economy’s mineral base is focused on backing up and stocking of the explored in-house mineral resources along with the redemption of the land which contains them and restriction of agricultural lands from being used for subsoil development. This activity is regulated by Law of 1976 "On the federal land policy and management". A special part is assigned by the law to the federal lands yield increase efforts.
Land ownership (real property) which includes land lots, subsoil lots, mining structures and other real estate is based upon a term freehold, i.e. free, fully legitimate and unconditional estate in freehold.
There are three main types of freehold estate: fee simple – title for cash, fee tail – entailed interest and life estate – lifetime title.
The US mining legislation offers a number of special tools which secure the mining law protection. Patent is the tool in the common law which authenticates the subsoil user’s proprietary rights.
In USA patent is a deed. In its virtue the government grants the subsoil use title. Patent is not obligatory and does not have a fixed period within which it must be received50.
In the Anglo-Saxon legal system (England, USA, Canada) the relationship arising from the devolution of subsoil rights are regulated by civil standards (civil codes adopted in the states of USA and provinces of Canada).
From their onset the US steel companies were the integrated plants dealing with metal ore, coking coal mining, production of iron, steel, pipes, steel structures as well as ferroalloys, refractories, rolls, oxygen and etc. required for internal consumption.
Noteworthy that USA has been the World’s leaders in the development of minimills. Minimills manufacture steel from scrap in electrical furnaces; they do without coke-oven batteries, blast furnaces and do not require that much of large-scale investments as the integrated plants do. Main difference of minimills from the integrated plants is in the fact that steel manufactured from iron ore and coke can be far cleaner that that from scrap which contains various impurities. This disadvantage restricts applications of minimill steel.
Over a period of previous three decades the US policy towards ferrous metallurgy has actually encouraged "minimillization”. As a matter of the US ferrous metallurgy development experience one may conclude that if we realistically estimate the existing potential of minimills the coexistence if not the symbiosis of the two sections in steel industry is the most effective: Minimills and integrated steel complexes51.
In the studies of the American Iron and Steel Institute the ferrous metallurgy is called the national strategic asset. The same say that sustainable and reliable national steel sources are vital for American economic and national security and the history of American steel industry has been integral with the economic, political and military development of the country. Emphatically, the loss of the national steel industry will make the American steel processors highly dependent on the foreign suppliers of the next generation steel product. It directly jeopardizes the economic leadership of USA in many critical branches of industry52.
South African Republic (SAR). South African Republic has a typical mixed legal system. SAR shows a coexistence of African customary law, Roman and Dutch law and English common law. So if we speak of the conceptual and categorial instruments and structure of the South African law then the SAR legal system is based upon the Roman law. As for the law-enforcement techniques in judicial practice, rules of proceedings, methods of evidence, use of court cases, court organization, objects and positions of a judge and attorneys then the specimen of the common law legal family explicitly prevail.
The private law in the SAR same as the legal system of the country in general, is of a hybrid character. Family, inheritance and property law is still dominated by the concepts of Roman and Dutch law whereas the influence of the English law is insignificant. It is stronger in the common contractual and tort law though here the concepts of the Roman law are also all together preserved. At the same time most special institutes of commercial law have yet purely English origin. As with the Roman-Germanic law system the private law of the SAR is traditionally subdivided into the law of persons, family law, property law, law of obligations (contracts, torts, unjust enrichment) and inheritance law.
Business legal structures are adopted from the English law and executed in the Companies Act (1973). Public companies (entitled to issue equity for open sale) must have at least 7 shareholders and the private companies can have one shareholder however not to exceed 50. The partnerships can have maximum 20 members.
In metal mining industry the most important regulations are: Mining Rights Registration Act (1967), Gem Stones Act (1964) and Resources Act (1991)53. Subsoil rights are typically separated from those of the respective land lot. Government is entitled to mine and dispose of precious metals, minerals and stones, which is effected by making the subsoil lots available for leasing. The mining right belongs to the owner of a land where they have been found.
China. Official name – the People’s Republic of China (PRC). In China due to its historical features, a specific character of national consciousness based upon the postulates of Confucianism, the role of law has been traditionally insignificant. China did not have a clear legal doctrine54.
Today the legislation of China is developed pursuant to Chinese Law named “On legislation” 2000.55 The Law sets forth the powers of regulatory and control bodies, the main principle and procedure of enacting, amending, displacing and repealing of statutes and regulatory legal acts.
In the sense of the legal force all legislative acts are divided as follows: Constitution has the supreme legal force, the level below is represented by statutes, resolutions of the State Council, the regional legal acts and departmental acts. Consequently the sources of mining law can be ranked according with the levels of governmental power (national and regional) or with the branches of governmental power (legislative, executive and judiciary).
For creating the conditions of market economy in the mining industry of the PRC a number of attempts have been made to regulate mining relations, in particular the reformation of subsoil and other natural resources control bodies. An emphasis should be made on the fact that the ‘joint competence’ issue in subsoil use just does not exist in the PRC. Reforming of the government control system offers effective exercising of state ownership rights on subsoil and resources.
In Chinese legal system the institute of subsoil and their resources ownership rights has both civil and inter-industry character since the title in this sphere features specific subjects, objects and content. The institute of the title in subsoil and their resources represents it as an aggregate of legal norms of various branches of law: constitutional, civil, administrative, land, environmental, financial and etc.56.
Art. 2 of the instruction on the obeyance of the PRC Law “On subsoil" defines ‘the mineral resources as the natural resources which had been formed in the course of geological processes, and have useful and usable properties, which are contained in subsoil in solid, liquid or gaseous state". The same article also contains classification and types of mineral resources. Mineral resources are subdivided into 4 groups and 168 types: 1) power resources including coal, gas from coal, black coal, slate coal, oil, natural gas, oily sands, mineral tar, uranium, thorium, subsurface thermal energy; 2) metals; 3) non-metals; 4) water and gas resources including underground water, mineral water, carbonic acids, hydrogen sulfide, helium and radon57.
Chinese mining law history is subdivided into three stages each of which УПrresponds to the action of a certain legislative act58.
First stage corresponds to the validity period of the 1907 Mining Charter of Jin Dynasty.
Second stage started in 1912 and finished in 1949 that the 1914 Mining Charter of the PRC and the 1930 Mining Law were adopted.
Third contemporary period started in 1949 when the Provisional Mining regulations of the PRC 1951 and the Provisional Subsoil protection regulations of 1965 were adopted but materially as late as from 1986 that the Law "On subsoil" of the PRC was adopted.
"General provisions on the railways for mining operations” adopted in 1898 was the first known legislative act with the mining law of China". The act determined governmental agencies, mining companies and individuals as the subjects of the mining relations and avowed the obligation of state to protect and patronize mining production59.
In 1902 the Ministry of Internal Affairs developed and published the Provisional Mining Charter of 1902, the second mining statute, which was, in the same manner as the first one, mainly targeted at the protection and patronizing of foreign investments, however the supervisory functions were tightened. Foreign investors had to receive an investment permit in a form of licenses from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. The same requirement also covered joint ventures in partnership with foreign investors.
Based upon the detailed translations of numerous mining statutes of England, USA, France, Austria, Belgium and a number of other countries the so-called Provisional Mining Charter of Jin was released in 1904.
The first Mining Charter of the PRC of 1914 was adopted by the Ministry of Agriculture and Trade under the Government of the PRC (1912-1928). It is based upon the Japanese statute "On mining operations” and the Mining Charter of Jin.
Between 1914 and 1928 adopted: the instruction in pursuance of the Mining Charter of the PRC, the incorporation regulations of subsoil use rights, the instruction in pursuance of the regulations of subsoil use rights as well as a number of other legal acts60.
Provisions of the PRC Mining Charter in the sphere of subsoil property stated that the state subsoil ownership right covers just land lots owned by state. Private property in subsoil lots and mineral deposits located with any land lots is allowed however state agencies are exclusively entitled to grant permits on exploration and operation of subsoil by special businesses. Furthermore, the statute allowed limitations of subsoil property rights and those of their resources for a certain category of persons who own land lots in terms of the widespread mineral resources, i.e. the interests of mining industry were primarily protected by the statute.
In 1930 the Government of the PRC adopted statute “On the mining business” based upon amending and changing of the PRC Mining Charter dated 1914.
The modern stage of mining legislation development in the People’s Republic of China (PRC) was marked by adoption of several legal acts: The provisional mining regulations of the State Council of the PRC dated April 18, 1951; the provisional subsoil protection regulations of the State Council of the PRC dated December 17, 1965; Statute of the PRC “On subsoil” dated May 19, 1986.
Before adoption of the "On subsoil" statute the issue of right-holders was resolved simply: State often identified as the nation in the mass was recognized as the single and sole holder of socialist property right in natural resources including that in the subsoil. Thus the Constitution of the PRC of 1982 determined that "subsoil, river and forest and the other natural resources are owned by state, i.e. they belong to the nation. The above cause the problem of legal capacity of state in practical application of law. On one hand, if the government is the subsoil and resources right-holder it means that they possess full and exclusive right in those and the nation lacks the right of subsoil use in its discretion; on the other hand, if the nation is the subsoil and resources property right-holder it may use those arbitrarily. Consequently, the problem of the state subsoil property right holder status arose61.
Subsoil resources which include the components useful for industrial application, have dual nature. On one hand before being mined they are the objects of right exclusively held by state. Resources held with subsoil are referred to as the immovables which have limited civil negotiability therefore all transactions of alienation and transfer of subsoil lot use rights are subject to state registration. In China the subsoil lot conditions and registration procedures for prospecting and exploration of mineral deposits (mining claims) for mining are regulated by special regulatory legal acts: Rules of subsoil registration for prospecting and exploration of mineral deposits of 1988; Rules of mineral deposit registration for resources mining of 1988; Rules of transfer of prospecting and exploration and mining rights of 1988.62 On the other hand, after being mined the mineral resources become the movables. They may be owned by any one else rather than exclusively by state.
Bibliography says that the category of ‘geological materials’ used in the Chinese statute “On subsoil” is identical to the definition of ’geological information’ used in Russian legislation. The ’geological information’ definition is much wider. Than the geological materials and provides more solutions of the problem of legislative control of mining and other relations63.
Subsoil use law in PRC differs both from that of Russia and yet that of the Western countries. The Mining legislation of PRC determines the subsoil use right referring exclusively to mining of mineral resources. The statute “On subsoil" of the PRC regulates just the processes of prospecting, exploration and extraction of mineral resources rather than the other types of subsoil use whereas the Russian legislation approaches the problem of legislative subsoil use control far wider.
According to Liu Huei the subsoil use right in PRC refers to the property right objects, the state registration is a form of public declaration of acquisition, changing and termination of the immovables right. The subsoil use right is approved by the subsoil use license which is issued by the authorized body upon registration. A list of exhibits to the license includes the documents to be submitted along with the request for the prospecting and exploration rights, envisaged in Art. 6 of the Rules of subsoil registration for prospecting and exploration of mineral deposits. The exhibits to the license do not include the provisions of the so-called license agreement because such agreement does not exist in the legislation of China.
Legal entities and individuals of foreign countries seeking for the license are to make a joint venture, an association of legal entities other than corporations, or a company which is obliged to be incorporated in China as a business. Foreign individuals and legal entities which are not registered in PRC may not request any prospecting and exploration rights. Prospecting and exploration license holder has a pre-emptive right to acquire the mining license.
Economics literature says that the industrial policy of China towards black metallurgy shows the fundamental features of economic reforms with Chinese specificity. Such features include the independent understanding of the foreign experience of restructuring and forced development of economy, free from any recumbence upon special recommendations from foreign consultants. Noteworthy that in terms of the concept the reforms were chosen to be guided by the institutional economic theory which favors the active industrial policy rather that the liberal theory in its radical form which rejects the above policy64.
According to the main doctrine of institutional economics the government should exercise constant active influence on the norms and rules of business behavior, i.e. guide the evolution or selection of the institutes since the spontaneous evolution of social relations do not always result into the selection of options adequate to the specific stage and level of economic development in this or that country65.
No wonder that the steelmaking industry of China proved to be extremely attractive for investments. World’s leading steelmaking corporations have shown an increasing interest both in exporting to Chinese market and in creation of joint ventures in China itself.
On the other hand. There is a threat of redundant facilities which is against the respective demand growth trends and energy capabilities of China. Energy consumption rate growth in China has already exceeded that of the national economy and in 2020 China will likely outpace the USA and will become the first country in energy consumption rates66.
Therefore the above examples of contemporary regulation of relations in metal mining and steelmaking industries of some industrial countries the following conclusions can be made.
First, from our point of view the specific nature of relations in metal mining and steelmaking industries is recognized and a respective combination of legal norms which regulate economic (business relations) is being formed with the subject sector of economy.
Second, metal mining and steelmaking legislation is typically characterized as a complex branch which includes norms from various branches of law (France, Germany, USA, Canada).
Third the industrial nations either use the adopted special statutes on coal and ore (USA, UK) or the metal mining and steel relations are regulated by special rules contained with the Mine Code or the mining statutes.
Four, the analysis of legislation on the relations between the federation and its subjects concerning the distribution of the federation subsoil property rights shows that the problem is important for all federated states. Thus B.D. Klyukin points out that these relations are legislatively regulated by establishing, rigorous recognizing and enforcing the principle of the federal legislation supremacy or upon the principle of a “competing skill” or upon the creation of an effective mechanism of conflict settlement and finally as it is done in the USA by means of civil transactions67.
1A.H. Saidov Comparative law (main contemporary legal systems): Textbook. M., 2009. P.236-237.
2R. Legeais Les grands systemes de droit contemporains: Une approche comparative/translation from French A.V. Gryadov M.: WoltersKluwer, 2009. P. 1.
3A.H. Saidov Index of works P. 237.
4A quotation from A.H. Saidov Index of works P. 245.
5A quotation from A.H. Saidov Index of works P. 246.
6See: David R. Major Legal Systems in the World Today (comparative law). M., 1967. P. 51-60.
7Quotation from M.N. Marchenko. Sources of the law. P. 418. See more details: R. David, C. Jauffret-Spinosi Major legal systems of the World today. M., 1998. P.29.
8M.N. Marchenko. Sources of law. P. 418.
9ibidem P. 463-464.
10B.D. Klyukin. Mining relations in the countries of Western Europe and America. M.: Print house Gorodets-izdat, 2000. P. 30.
11B.D. Klyukin. Index of works P. 20.
12K. Osakve. Comparative law: schematic comment. - M.: Yurist, 2008. P. 137.
13V.S. Belykh. Transport legislation of Russia and foreign countries, EU, SCO, EurAsEC (comparative law analysis): Workbook / Associate Editor V.A. Bublik – I.: Prospekt, 2009. P. 66.
14See details: M.N. Marchenko. Sources of law. P. 519-534.
15Marchenko M.N. ibidem P. 559-560.
16V.S. Belykh. Transport legislation of Russia and foreign countries, EU, SCO, EurAsEC (comparative law analysis). P. 59
17I.Yu. Bogdanovskaya, Statute in the English law. M., 1987. P. 121-139.
18V.S. Belykh. Transport legislation of Russia and foreign countries, EU, SCO, EurAsEC (comparative law analysis). P. 60
19D.V. Vasilevskaya Legal regulation of subsurface use relations in Russian Federation and abroad: Theory and practice. M., 2007. P.107.
20Klyukin B.D. ibidem P. 20.
21A.A. Stoff. Comparative essay of mining law in Russia and Western Europe. St.Petersburg. 1882. P. 2-66.
22K.I. Naletov. License-based and contractual forms of subsurface use in RF and abroad. Dis. …m.of laws M., 2006. P. 13.
23See history of the civil law of France for more details: K. Zweigert, H, Ketz. Introduction into comparative jurisprudence within the private law: Volume 2 Translated from German M., 1998. v. 1. Fundamentals. P. 118-219.
24See: Civil Code of France: Commentary M., 2008. P. 752
25See: Commercial Code of France / foreword, translated from French, amendment, the reference wordbook and commentary by V.N. Zakhvataeva. M.: Wolters Kluwer, 2008. P. 5-6.
26French mining code published by the Ministry of Industry, post, telecommunications and foreign trade of France in 1995, see: B.D. Klyukin. Index of works P. 230-284.
27Excerpt from B.D. Klyukin. Index of works P. 31-32.
28B.D. Klyukin. Index of works P. 50.
29M.N. Marchenko. Index of works P. 465.
30Text of GCC in Russian has been published in a collected book “Civil, commercial and family law of capitalistic countries: collected book of regulatory acts: Civil and commercial codes: Schoolbook/under the editorship of V.K. Puchinskiy, M.I. Kulagin. M., 1986. P.126-184.
31Text of GComC in Russian has been published in a collected book “Civil, commercial and family law of capitalistic countries: collected book of regulatory acts: Civil and commercial codes: Schoolbook/under the editorship of V.K. Puchinskiy, M.I. Kulagin. M., 1986. P.165-165.
32Text of the Mining law of FRG of 1980 in Russian published in “Mining relationship in the countries of Western Europe and America". B.D. Klyukin, P. 285-383.
33Constitutions of foreign countries. M.: BEK, 1996. P. 159.
34See: B.D. Klyukin. Index of works P. 64.
35Text of ECSC treaty see: Treaties which establish European communities. M., 1994. P. 19-14.
36European law. European Union Law and legal groundwork for Human Rights Watch: University textbook/ composite authors leader and Associate Editor, Doctor of law, prof. L.M. Entin. – 2nd edition, revised and amended - M.: Norma, 2005. P. 12.
37V.S. Lisin. Formation of the conceptual grounds for business development of ferrous metallurgy under global competition. Thesis, Doctor of Economics, M., 2005. P. 124.
39I.Yu. Bogdanovskaya, Statute in the English law. M., 1987. P. 121-139.
40See: M.N. Marchenko. Index of works P. 570-575.
41See: V.S. Belykh. Transport legislation of Russia and foreign countries, EU, SCO, EurAsEC (comparative law analysis). P. 59
42V.S. Belykh. Transport legislation of Russia and foreign countries, EU, SCO, EurAsEC (comparative law analysis). P. 60
43See: Barton B.J. Canadian Law of Mining. Calgary. 1993. P. 1-2.
44See: V.S. Belykh. Transport legislation of Russia and foreign countries, EU, SCO, EurAsEC (comparative law analysis). P. 63
45E. Scott. Problems of Canadian resources management // USA: Economy, politics, ideology. 1990. ? 8. P. 71-76.
46See: K.I. Naletov. Index of works P. 66.
47See: V.M. Shumilov. The US legal system: Textbook M., 2006. P.45.
48Quotation from V.S. Belykh Transport legislation of Russia and foreign countries, EU, SCO, EurAsEC (comparative law analysis). P. 68
50See details: B.D. Klyukin. Index of works P. 67.
51See details: V.S. Lisin, Eenei A.N. Index P. 144.
52Perspective: American Steel & Domestic Manufacturing// American Iron and Steel Institute. 2003. (www.aisi.org)
53The text of the Resources Act of SAR 1991 in Russian language is published in the treatise of B.D. Klyukin named Mining relations in the countries of Western Europe and America. P. 384-440.
54V.S. Belykh. Transport legislation of Russia and foreign countries, EU, SCO, EurAsEC (comparative law analysis). P. 78
55Collection of legislative and regulatory legal acts which regulate land and mining relations. P. 34 -44.
56Liu Huei. Legal regulation of mining relations in the PRC. Thesis, Doctor of Legal Sciences, M., 2003. P.9.
57ibidem P. 12.
58ibidem P. 13-14.
59Collection of Chinese mining statutes and legal acts. Ch. II. Addenda to “The History of mining law development in China”. P. 96-98.
60Liu Huei. Index P. 22.
61See: Liu Huei. Index P. 31.
62See: Collection of legislative and regulatory legal acts which regulate land and mining relations. Beijing, 2000. P. 1139 – 1149.
63Liu Huei. Index P. 42.
64See: O.N. Borokh. Contemporary Chinese economic idea. M.: Publishing firm “Oriental literature” the Russian Academy of Sciences, 1998.
65B.S. Lisin. Institutional aspects of economic reforms in Russia. Monograph. – 2nd edition, revised and amended - M.: Vysh.shk., 2000. p.16.
66The Chinese specialist calls for the limitation of the annual steel output within 210 mln. tons // Xinhuanet news, 27.05.2004 (http://www.xinhuanet.com)
67B.D. Klyukin. Index of works P. 64.