期刊文献+

再论我国的“不方便法院”原则

The Doctrine of Forum Non Conveniens in China—Revisited
下载PDF
导出
摘要 "不方便法院"是英美法系法院在受理案件过程中普遍运用的原则,而在大陆法系,该原则却极少被接受。由于我国基本继承了大陆法系的传统,该原则原本也不被我国法律所采纳。但是,近二十年来,该原则却逐渐被我国法学界所关注,并且在我国法院涉外审判实践中,事实上已得到了适用。我国的一些学者对此已有所论述。本文作者通过系统研究我国法院对该原则的适用情况得出:相对于英美来讲,该原则在我国仅仅是得到了限制性地适用,这与我国司法系统构成现状和涉外管辖权体系相符。展望未来,"不方便法院"原则应当被我国法律所吸收,最高院可以制定出更多针对该原则的适用细则。 Forum non conveniens is a popular doctrine in common law jurisdictions but it is generally rejected in civil law countries.Historically China is a country with civil law tradition and Chinese law accordingly does not recognize this doctrine.Nevertheless, this doctrine has gradually attracted more and more academic attention and been de facto applied by some Chinese courts in the past decades.A systematic survey of Chinese courts’ practice,however,demonstrates that compared with those in the US and UK, the Chinese version of this doctrine is quite a limited one,which is compatible with the Chinese jurisdictional background and judicial reality.Looking to the future,this doctrine should be formallyrecognized in Chinese law and more details on its application have to be worked out.
作者 涂广建
出处 《武大国际法评论》 CSSCI 2013年第1期105-126,共22页 Wuhan University International Law Review
关键词 涉外管辖权不方便法院 international jurisdiction forum non conveniens China
  • 相关文献

参考文献13

  • 1王彦君,王淑梅,余晓汉,万鄂湘.最高人民法院海事海商审判综述(2010年至2011年)[J].武大国际法评论,2012(2):1-29. 被引量:3
  • 2施适,滕梅.不方便法院原则在中国的发展现状——兼评中国涉外民商事案件管辖原则之异动[J].法律适用,2003(7):60-64. 被引量:13
  • 3胡振杰.不方便法院说比较研究[J].法学研究,2002,24(4):138-153. 被引量:17
  • 4Paul R. Beaumont.A United Kingdom Perspective on the Proposed Hague Judgments Convention[].BROOK J INT’’L L.1998
  • 5William Tetley.Mixed Jurisdictions:common law v.civil law (codified and uncodiified)[].Louisiana Law Review.2000
  • 6A.T.von Mehren.Theory and Practice of Adjudicatory Authority in Private International Law: A Comparative Study of the Doctrine, Policies and Practices of Common and Civil-Law Systems[].Recueil des cours.2002
  • 7James J.Fawcett."General Report"[].Declining Jurisdiction in Private International Law.2005
  • 8James J Fawcett."General Report"[].Declining Jurisdiction in Private International Law.2005
  • 9Konstantinos D Kerameus.A Civilian Lawyer Looks at Common Law Procedure[].Louisiana Law Review.1987
  • 10James J Fawcett.Non-Exclusive Jurisdiction Agreements in Private International Law[].Lloyd’’s Maritime and Commercial Law Quarterly.2001

二级参考文献113

  • 1刘卫翔,郑自文.国际民事诉讼中“不方便法院”原则论[J].法学评论,1997,15(4):46-50. 被引量:20
  • 2I.e., Garter v. Trafalgar Tours Ltd., see 704 F. Sapp. (W.D.VIR. 1989), p. 673.
  • 3See A. A. Ehrenzweig, op. cit., p. 305.
  • 4Cf., Permanent Bureau, 1996 Prel. Doe. No. 3, p. 2.
  • 5Cf., for instance, A. F. Lowenfeld, Forum Shopping, Antisuit Injunctions, Negative Declarations, and Rdated Tools of Internationational Litigation, 91 The American Journal of International Law (1997), pp. 322-324.
  • 6Cf., Permanent Bureau, op cit., p. 4.
  • 7Cf., Permanent Bureau, op cit., p. 2.
  • 8Cf., Permanent Bureau, Synthesis of the Work of the Special Commission of March 1998 on International Jurisdiction and the Efofats of Foreign Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters, drawn by Catherine Kessedjian, Preliminary Document No. 9 (1998), para. 101, p. 43.
  • 9中国国际私法学会.《中华人民共和国国际私法示范法》(第6稿)第51条.
  • 10See J. J. Fawcett, Declining Jurisdiction in Private International Law (Oxford 1995), p. 10.

共引文献28

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