期刊文献+

论美国与欧盟国家域外取证领域的冲突及其解决 被引量:7

The Solution of the Conflicts between the U.S.and the EU Countries in the Field of Cross-border Discovery
原文传递
导出
摘要 随着信息技术的发展,欧盟国家对数据隐私保护法实施的加强,欧盟国家与美国在域外取证特别是域外电子取证领域的冲突更加激烈。美国法院要求有关当事人提交某些证据文件包括电子存储信息,如果不予提交则可能会面临美国联邦民事程序规则中的制裁。如果当事人遵守美国法院的要求提交有关信息,又可能面临其本国法律禁止提交有关信息的规定,同样也可能会招致民事或刑事制裁。为此,不仅有关国家间需要进行更多的国际合作,而且国际民事诉讼的有关当事人必须确定合理的诉讼策略,以防受到实际的制裁。我国应借鉴欧盟国家的经验,建立完善我国个人数据保护法律制度以及跨国数据流转方面的法律制度,同时理性对待美国跨国民事诉讼中的证据开示制度。 With the development of information technology and the enhancement of the protection for data privacy in the EU countries, the conflicts between the U. S. and EU countries in the aspect of taking of evidence abroad especially e-discovery is becoming more and more serious. The U. S. courts may require the transnational litigants to provide some documents including ESI. The refusal of providing the required documents may result in the sanctions under Federal Civil Procedure Rules. If the parties provide the documents according to the U.S. courts orders, they may violate the prohibitions of their own national laws, which also would lead to civil or criminal punishment. Therefore, not only the relevant countries need further cooperation, but also the transnational litigants have to choose a rational litigation strategy in case of real punishment. We need to learn from the EU countries to establish and improve our legal system of individual date protection and cross-border transfer of the data. Moreover,we must take a proper attitude to the discovery in transnational litigations in the U.S. courts.
作者 郭玉军
出处 《河北法学》 CSSCI 北大核心 2011年第4期23-30,共8页 Hebei Law Science
关键词 域外取证 证据开示 海牙取证公约 电子存储信息 taking of evidence abroad discovery Hague Evidence Convention ESI
  • 相关文献

参考文献25

  • 1The Sedona Conference Framework for Analysis of Cross-Border Discovery Conflicts; A Practical Guide to Navigating the Competing Currents of International Data Privacy and Discovery, 2008 Public Comment Version,p. 15 ,pl 1.
  • 2Shannon Capone Kirk, Emily Cobb and Michael Robotti. When U.S. E-Discovery Meets EU Roadblocks[ J]. The National Law Journal December 22, 2008. 10.
  • 3Privacy & Security Law Report, 8 PVLR 1240, 8/24/2009. The Bureau of National Affairs, Inc. (800 -372 -1033) http.// www. bna. corn, visited on Nov. l, 20.
  • 4Carla L. Reyes. The U.S. Discovery-EU Privacy Directive Conflict. Constructing A Three-Tiered Compliance Strategy[J]. Duke Journal of Comparative & International Law, Vol. 19,2009 ,pp. 373 -76.
  • 5Marissa L. P. Caylor. Moderning the Hague Evidence Convention. A Proposed Solution to Cross-Border Discovery Conflicts During Civil and Commercial Litigation. [ J]. Boston University International Law Journal, Vol. 28,2010 ,p. 368,.
  • 6James Michael. Self-regulation is not enough[ J]. Privacy Laws & Business Intl Newsletter, Oct. 2008, p. 2.
  • 7王育琪.美国的证据开示程序与相关国际公约的冲突问题研究[J].学术问题研究,2007,0(2):65-71. 被引量:1
  • 8王孛.美国与欧盟个人信息跨国流通安全港协议简论[J].知识经济,2008(4):46-47. 被引量:13
  • 9Volkswagen v. Valdez, Volkswagen, 909 S. W. 2d at 902 - 03.
  • 10149 F.R.D. 28, 34-35,(S.D.N.Y. 1993) .

二级参考文献14

  • 1齐爱民.论个人信息的法律保护[J].苏州大学学报(哲学社会科学版),2005,21(2):30-35. 被引量:144
  • 2Pierburg GmbH&Co v.Superior Court of Los An-geles. 186Cal.Rptr.876 . 1982
  • 3Y Daphne Coelho-Adam.Fishing for the Smoking Gun:The Need for British Courts to Grant American Style Ex-traterritorial Discovery Requests in U.S.Industry-Wide Tort Actions. Vand.J.Transna’l.L . 2000
  • 4Societe Nationale Industrielle Aerospatiale v.U.S.District Court. 482U.S522 . 1987
  • 5Stephen B.Burbank.The World in Our Courts. Mich.L.Rev . 1991
  • 6John C.Plaster.The Hague Evidence Convention:the Need for Guidance on Procedures and Resolution of Con-flicts in Transnational Discovery. Vand.J.Transnat’l L . 1994
  • 7Haynes v.Kleinwefers. 119FRD335 . 1988
  • 8Benton Graphics v.Uddeholm Corp. 118FRD386 . 1987
  • 9Hudson v.Hermann Pfanter GmbH&Co. 117FRD33 . 1987
  • 10Sandsend Financial Consultants v.Wood. 743SW2d364 .

同被引文献66

引证文献7

二级引证文献5

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部