English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Whether the Numerus Clausus Principle is adhered to in IP Rights (IPRs) Law determines whether judges have the discretion to explain the rights that have not been legislated in a case. Legal interest is the superordinate concept of right, and “other rights and interests prescribed by law” in Article(Art) 126 of the Civil Code of the PRC refer to different types of legal interests. The legal interests that judges give relief by exerting their discretion in a case are the “interest” in Art 126 of the Civil Code, which has not risen to legal rights. Those flexible expressions conflicting with the Numerus Clausus Principle in the separate IPRs laws should be revised in the future. The Numerus Clausus Principle also requires judges to apply open concepts carefully when judging and reasoning, and protecting legal interests discriminatively.

The clarification and application of the Numerus Clausus Principle of IP Rights in China