国际私法中法院放弃管辖权问题研究

发布时间：2018-05-08 18:16

本文选题：管辖权 + 放弃管辖权　；参考：《西南政法大学》2011年硕士论文

【摘要】：法院管辖权是法院对案件行使审判权的基础,也是各国在解决国际民商事纠纷中首要确定的问题。随着国际经济的发展和国际民商事往来的日趋频繁,民商事矛盾冲突也越来越多。为了更好的保护本国和国民的利益,各国基于本国主权,尽可能地扩大本国法院对国际民商事争议的管辖权,争夺案件管辖权的局面由此产生。争夺管辖权不仅不能使纠纷得到合理的解决,反而会形成各国法院独自受理审理案件的局面,导致平行诉讼的发生。平行诉讼又会使同一案件形成了多份判决且得不到合理的执行,使许多案件的审理归于无意义,对当事人和法院也造成了巨大的负担。为了缓解这种局面,各国都在积极寻求解决国际民商事管辖权冲突的方法。由于管辖权问题的复杂性且涉及到各国的司法主权,目前距离各国达成统一的国际管辖权规则还不具可能性。各国只能通过国内立法、签订条约、对等互惠等方式减少国际管辖权冲突。在这种情况下,各国法院在处理国际民商事案件时放弃部分案件管辖权的做法对缓解国际民商事管辖权冲突就显得尤为重要。这种做法也为以后的国际和国内管辖权规则提供新的可行性方法和思路。因此,对法院放弃管辖权问题的研究也具有重要的理论和实际意义。文章共分为五个部分: 第一部分主要对放弃管辖权这一基本概念进行解释和界定。本部分从国际民事诉讼管辖权的分析出发,通过对管辖权的分析来说明放弃管辖权的范围和内涵,并对放弃管辖权的依据和类型做出说明。第二部分主要通过比较的方法对不方便法院原则进行分析和阐述。本部分采用比较法的分析方法分析普通法系国家的一些做法,理清不方便法院原则的体系并对各国的不方便法院原则进行比较。此后分析大陆法系为什么不采用不方便法院原则,以及遇到类似情形时替代不方便法院原则的做法。第三部分主要论及平行诉讼问题中的放弃管辖权规则。本部分从普通法系的不方便法院原则、禁诉令、欧盟公约中的受理在先的原则以及大陆法系国家的判决承认与执行规则来分析与解决平行诉讼中的一些问题。第四部分主要阐述当事人意思自治对法院放弃管辖权的影响。本部分主要通过协议管辖和仲裁两种制度分析该制度在法院放弃管辖权方面的效力,并对各国在协议管辖和仲裁的一些共同性规则进行相关的分析与论述。第五部分主要阐述上文中所论述的放弃管辖权的规则对我国的影响。本部分从不方便法院原则、平行诉讼、协议管辖和仲裁的角度分析我国国际管辖权制度存在的问题,并对完善我国在国际民商事案件中法院放弃管辖权制度提出一些建议。
[Abstract]:The jurisdiction of the court is the basis for the court to exercise its jurisdiction over a case, and it is also the most important issue to be determined in the settlement of international civil and commercial disputes. With the development of international economy and the increasing frequency of international civil and commercial exchanges, conflicts between civil and commercial conflicts are becoming more and more. In order to better protect the interests of their own countries and nationals, based on their own sovereignty, countries expand the jurisdiction of their courts over international civil and commercial disputes as far as possible, thus creating the situation of competing for jurisdiction in cases. Scrambling for jurisdiction not only can not make the dispute be solved reasonably, but will form the situation that the court of each country alone accepts the case, which leads to the parallel litigation. Parallel litigation will make the same case form a number of judgments and can not be reasonably executed, so that many cases of trial is meaningless, and the parties and the court has also caused a huge burden. In order to alleviate this situation, all countries are actively seeking to resolve the conflict of international civil and commercial jurisdiction. Due to the complexity of jurisdiction and the judicial sovereignty of each country, it is not possible to reach a unified international jurisdiction rule. Countries can only reduce conflicts of international jurisdiction through domestic legislation, signing treaties, reciprocity and so on. In this case, it is particularly important for the courts of various countries to give up part of their jurisdiction in dealing with international civil and commercial cases in order to alleviate the conflicts of international civil and commercial jurisdiction. This practice also provides new feasible methods and ideas for future international and domestic jurisdiction rules. Therefore, the research on the issue of the court waiving jurisdiction also has important theoretical and practical significance. The article is divided into five parts: The first part mainly explains and defines the basic concept of waiver of jurisdiction. Starting from the analysis of jurisdiction in international civil action, this part explains the scope and connotation of waiver of jurisdiction through the analysis of jurisdiction, and explains the basis and type of waiver of jurisdiction. The second part mainly analyzes and expounds the principle of inconvenient court by means of comparison. This part uses the comparative method to analyze some practices of common law countries, clarifies the system of inconvenient court principle and compares the inconvenient court principle of various countries. Then it analyzes why the inconvenient court principle is not adopted in the civil law system and the practice of replacing the inconvenient court principle in the event of a similar situation. The third part mainly deals with the rule of waiver of jurisdiction in parallel litigation. This part analyzes and resolves some problems in parallel litigation from the principles of inconvenient courts in common law system, injunctive orders, the principle of admissibility first in EU conventions and the rules of judgment recognition and enforcement in civil law countries. The fourth part mainly expounds the influence of party autonomy on the court's abdication of jurisdiction. This part mainly analyzes the effectiveness of this system in the court waiving jurisdiction through the two systems of agreement jurisdiction and arbitration, and analyzes and discusses some common rules of agreement jurisdiction and arbitration. The fifth part mainly expounds the influence of the rule of waiver of jurisdiction discussed above on our country. This part analyzes the problems existing in China's international jurisdiction system from the point of view of inconvenient court principle, parallel litigation, agreed jurisdiction and arbitration, and puts forward some suggestions for perfecting the system of court relinquishing jurisdiction in international civil and commercial cases.
【学位授予单位】：西南政法大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2011
【分类号】：D997

【引证文献】