论禁诉令制度在英美国家的运用及对我国的启示
发布时间：2019-01-07 21:34
【摘要】：禁诉令制度是英美法系国家解决国际民商事管辖权冲突的有效途径之一，其在应对国际平行诉讼和挑选法院现象、防御其他国家过度管辖权、保护本国的司法主权以及保护本国公民的利益方面都对英美国家发挥了重要作用，但我国对禁诉令制度的研究尚不深入。本文力图通过对英国和美国禁诉令制度的介绍来考察将禁诉令制度引入我国的必要性和可能性，并尝试对我国的禁诉令制度进行相应的构建，以期对我国禁诉令制度的研究贡献自己的微薄之力。 本文写作将采用实证分析方法和比较分析方法。首先通过案例对英国和美国禁诉令的运用现状进行实证分析；然后在实证分析的基础上，对两个国家禁诉令的相关问题进行比较，以期对我国禁诉令制度的构建提供一些思路。 本文分为五部分。 第一部分介绍了两个有关我国当事人遭受外国禁诉令的案例，这些案例引出了一些需要我们思考的问题。 第二部分是禁诉令制度的概述。这部分是关于禁诉令的基础知识，对禁诉令的起源与发展、禁诉令的性质以及禁诉令的功能与缺陷进行了详细的分析，为论文后面部分打下基础。 第三部分是英国禁诉令制度的介绍。由于布鲁塞尔公约体系对英国禁诉令的冲击，所以在欧盟管辖权体系之内和欧盟管辖权体系之外，英国禁诉令所发挥的作用是不一样的。因此，对英国禁诉令的介绍分为三个小部分：第一小部分介绍英国禁诉令在欧盟管辖权体系之内的运用；第二小部分介绍英国禁诉令在欧盟管辖权体系之外的运用；最后一部分对英国禁诉令的运用进行简要评析。 第四部分是美国禁诉令制度的介绍。这部分分为四个小部分：第一小部分介绍美国通常签发禁诉令的情形；第二小部分介绍美国签发禁诉令的两种传统方法及其新发展；第三小部分介绍美国法院签发禁诉令的“类型”诉讼；最后一部分对美国禁诉令与英国禁诉令的运用进行比较评析。 第五部分是考察禁诉令与中国的问题。这部分分为四个小部分：第一小部分对中国目前存在的“形式最接近禁诉令的规则”进行考察，，主要指海事强制令、诉前禁令与行为保全制度；第二小部分探讨了中国应对外国禁诉令的方法；第三小部分对中国引入禁诉令的可行性进行探讨；最后一部分是对我国禁诉令制度的相应构建。
[Abstract]:The injunction system is one of the effective ways to solve the conflicts of international civil and commercial jurisdiction in Anglo-American legal system countries, and it defends the excessive jurisdiction of other countries by dealing with the phenomenon of international parallel litigation and selecting courts. The protection of judicial sovereignty and the protection of the interests of its citizens have played an important role in British and American countries, but our research on the injunction system is not deep. This paper attempts to investigate the necessity and possibility of introducing the injunction system into our country through the introduction of the injunction system in the United Kingdom and the United States, and tries to construct the injunction system of our country accordingly. In order to make a contribution to the research of the injunction system in our country. This paper will use empirical analysis method and comparative analysis method. Firstly, this paper makes an empirical analysis of the current situation of the application of injunction in the United Kingdom and the United States; then, on the basis of the empirical analysis, compares the relevant issues of the injunction in the two countries in order to provide some ideas for the construction of the injunction system in our country. This paper is divided into five parts. The first part introduces two cases about the Chinese litigants suffering from foreign injunction, which leads to some problems that need our consideration. The second part is the summary of injunction system. This part is about the basic knowledge of the injunction, the origin and development of the injunction, the nature of the injunction, the function and defects of the injunction, which lays the foundation for the later part of the thesis. The third part is the introduction of the injunction system in Britain. Because of the impact of the Brussels Convention system on the British injunction, the British injunction plays a different role within the EU jurisdiction system and outside the EU jurisdiction system. Therefore, the introduction of the injunction is divided into three parts: the first part introduces the application of the injunction in the jurisdiction system of the EU, the second part introduces the application of the injunction outside the jurisdiction system of the EU. The last part makes a brief comment on the application of the injunction in Britain. The fourth part is the introduction of American injunction system. This part is divided into four parts: the first part introduces the situation that the United States usually issues injunctive orders, the second part introduces the two traditional methods of issuing injunctive orders in the United States and their new development. The third part introduces the "types" of injunctions issued by American courts, and the last part compares the use of American injunctions with British injunctions. The fifth part is to investigate the injunction and China's problems. This part is divided into four small parts: the first small part of China's current "form closest to the prohibition of action order rules", mainly refers to maritime injunctions, pre-litigation injunctions and acts of preservation system; The second part discusses how China should deal with the foreign injunction; the third part discusses the feasibility of introducing the injunction; the last part is the corresponding construction of China's injunction system.
【学位授予单位】：西南政法大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2014
【分类号】：D997.4
本文编号：2404195
[Abstract]:The injunction system is one of the effective ways to solve the conflicts of international civil and commercial jurisdiction in Anglo-American legal system countries, and it defends the excessive jurisdiction of other countries by dealing with the phenomenon of international parallel litigation and selecting courts. The protection of judicial sovereignty and the protection of the interests of its citizens have played an important role in British and American countries, but our research on the injunction system is not deep. This paper attempts to investigate the necessity and possibility of introducing the injunction system into our country through the introduction of the injunction system in the United Kingdom and the United States, and tries to construct the injunction system of our country accordingly. In order to make a contribution to the research of the injunction system in our country. This paper will use empirical analysis method and comparative analysis method. Firstly, this paper makes an empirical analysis of the current situation of the application of injunction in the United Kingdom and the United States; then, on the basis of the empirical analysis, compares the relevant issues of the injunction in the two countries in order to provide some ideas for the construction of the injunction system in our country. This paper is divided into five parts. The first part introduces two cases about the Chinese litigants suffering from foreign injunction, which leads to some problems that need our consideration. The second part is the summary of injunction system. This part is about the basic knowledge of the injunction, the origin and development of the injunction, the nature of the injunction, the function and defects of the injunction, which lays the foundation for the later part of the thesis. The third part is the introduction of the injunction system in Britain. Because of the impact of the Brussels Convention system on the British injunction, the British injunction plays a different role within the EU jurisdiction system and outside the EU jurisdiction system. Therefore, the introduction of the injunction is divided into three parts: the first part introduces the application of the injunction in the jurisdiction system of the EU, the second part introduces the application of the injunction outside the jurisdiction system of the EU. The last part makes a brief comment on the application of the injunction in Britain. The fourth part is the introduction of American injunction system. This part is divided into four parts: the first part introduces the situation that the United States usually issues injunctive orders, the second part introduces the two traditional methods of issuing injunctive orders in the United States and their new development. The third part introduces the "types" of injunctions issued by American courts, and the last part compares the use of American injunctions with British injunctions. The fifth part is to investigate the injunction and China's problems. This part is divided into four small parts: the first small part of China's current "form closest to the prohibition of action order rules", mainly refers to maritime injunctions, pre-litigation injunctions and acts of preservation system; The second part discusses how China should deal with the foreign injunction; the third part discusses the feasibility of introducing the injunction; the last part is the corresponding construction of China's injunction system.
【学位授予单位】：西南政法大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2014
【分类号】：D997.4
【参考文献】
相关期刊论文 前10条
1 范跃如;;试论我国行为保全制度及其构建与完善[J];法学家;2004年05期
2 王娟;;关于我国引入禁诉令制度的思考[J];法学评论;2009年06期
3 张利民;;国际民诉中禁诉令的运用及我国禁诉令制度的构建[J];法学;2007年03期
4 胡充寒;;我国知识产权诉前禁令制度的现实考察及正当性构建[J];法学;2011年10期
5 徐伟功;;美国国际民事管辖权中的两大阀门——不方便法院原则与禁诉命令[J];甘肃政法学院学报;2006年02期
6 徐伟功,黄鹏;简析美国国际平行诉讼中的禁诉命令[J];河南师范大学学报(哲学社会科学版);2005年05期
7 徐伟功;WTO与我国国际私法自由裁量权条款的设计[J];湖南省政法管理干部学院学报;2002年04期
8 欧福永;;论禁诉令在解决中国内地与香港民商事管辖权积极冲突中的运用[J];时代法学;2009年04期
9 张丽英;尚迪;;从“尼亚加拉海运公司诉天津钢铁集团”案析英国禁诉令[J];世界海运;2012年03期
10 姚建军;;英美法系国家(地区)的禁诉令制度及对我国的借鉴[J];人民司法;2011年01期
本文编号：2404195
本文链接：https://www.wllwen.com/falvlunwen/guojifa/2404195.html
