国际民商事判决承认与执行中的司法礼让原则——对英国与加拿大相关理论及实践的考察

On the Courtesy Principle in Acknowledging and Executing of International Civil Judgments

英国自17世纪开始承认和执行外国法院判决以来,在承认和执行外国判决的理论依据方面先后经历了"礼让说"、"债务论"等理论,1907年的艾默纽尔诉希芒案(Emanuel v.Symon)所确立的五条规则,基本上是英国法院承认和执行外国对人诉讼判决的基本规则。但1953年特华斯诉浩利案(Travers v.Holly)的判决,使得英国上诉法院开始考虑司法礼让问题;加拿大在1990年的莫哥德投资有限公司(Morguard Investments Ltd.v.De Savoye)案之前,一直遵循希芒案规则。但莫哥德投资公司案判例所包含的司法礼让规则,丰富了加拿大国际私法的"就近原则"。莫哥德投资公司案由此成为加拿大各姊妹省相互间承认和执行法院判决具有里程碑意义的判例。英国及加拿大的理论与实践,对解决我国各法域间民商事判决的相互承认与执行问题,无疑具有重要借鉴意义。

Since England began to recognize and enforce foreign judgments in the 17th century,Englishtheories concerned about why foreign judgment ought to be so have been developed including ＂the comity theory＂ and ＂the debt doctrine＂. Generally speaking,＂The Five Rules＂ established in Emanuel v. Symon（ 1907） are the fundamental rules for English courts to recognize and enforce foreign judgments. But the decision of Travers v. Holly （ 1953） drove the Court of Appeal of England and Wales to think about the issue ofjudicial comity. In Canada,＂the Symon Rules＂ had been followed until Morguard Investments Ltd. v. De Savoye （ 1990）. The rule of judicial comity embodied in that precedent enriched ＂the principle of proximity＂ inCanadian private international law. Morguard Investments Ltd. v. De Savoye is a milestone in recognizing andenforcing judgment between the courts of sister provinces in Canada. Those theories and practices in Englandand Canada are clearly important for the Chinese jurisdictions to recognize and enforce judgments in civil andcommercial matters between them.