泰国的涉外民商事管辖权制度

在泰国,对不涉及不动产或与此相关的权利和利益的诉讼,由被告住所地或诉因发生地能行使地域管辖权的法院管辖;有关不动产或其他与不动产有关的权利的诉讼,由有地域管辖权的被告住所地法院或不动产所在地法院管辖.外国国家不能成为泰国法院的当事人;当事人不能自主地选择管辖法院;在外国法院待审的案件还可向有管辖权的泰国法院提交;泰国法律制度中没有不方便法院这一概念.     

确立我国涉外民商事管辖权的考量因素

我国现行民事诉讼法在涉外诉讼案件管辖问题上的规定过于简单。这种方式不利于我国法院对涉外案件行使管辖权。正值修改民事诉讼法之际,应根据涉外案件管辖的特点,考虑多方面因素,科学制定涉外管辖标准,适当扩张我国的涉外案件管辖权,以适应我国对外交往扩大的需要,从而达到方便当事人诉讼的目的。     

涉外离婚诉讼管辖问题研究

我国涉外离婚诉讼管辖以原告就被告的一般民事管辖原则为基础,以住所地、国籍国、惯常居所地为主要的管辖依据,法律法规中仅对有限的管辖消极冲突情况做了些许规定,对管辖权积极冲突的处理一概采取平行管辖原则。但是在涉外民事诉讼的管辖问题上为适应新形势的发展,新的管辖原则已经产生并被适用,在涉外离婚诉讼的管辖问题上也是如此。     

最高人民法院关于涉外海事诉讼管辖的具体规定(一九八六年一月三十一日最高人民法院审判委员会通过)

为了维护国家主权,保护海事诉讼当事人的合法权益,便于海事诉讼的及时进行,现根据《中华人民共和国民事诉讼法(试行)》、《中华人民共和国海洋环境保护法》、《中华人民共和国海上交通安全法》以及我国参加的有关国际公约,并参照国际习惯做法,对我国海事法院的涉外海事诉讼管辖具体规     

尼日利亚法院处理涉外民商事案件的理论与实践

管辖权问题和法律适用问题是一国法院在处理涉外民商事案件时必须要解决的两个基本问题。尼日利亚法院通常依被告或诉讼标的物"出现"或"位于"其管辖权范围内、传票能够送达被告、被告接受法院的管辖或当事人之间的管辖权协议为由对涉外民商事案件行使管辖,对于涉外民商事案件的法律适用,尼日利亚法院通常适用法院地法,不过,在当事人选择了解决争议的准据法时,尼日利亚法院会尊重他们的选择。     

非方便法院原则及其适用

非方便法院原则及其适用凌祁漫非方便法院原则也称不便管辖原则，是涉外民事诉讼中法院自由裁量行使司法管辖权的一项规则。它是指受诉法院认为其受理的某一涉外民事案件在外国法院进行诉讼，对当事人更为方便和公正时，可自由裁量，拒绝或放弃行使管辖权，从而促使当事人...     

涉外离婚诉讼管辖权问题研究

离婚是既存婚姻关系解除的一种方式。除协议离婚以外,在采取判决离婚制的国家,并非当事人具备法定离婚条件,当然就发生离婚效果,而须经法院或其它行政机关的参与,经其审理准允后,始能发生解除婚姻的效力。因此,处理涉外离婚案件,在国际私法上便发生应由何国法院管辖,即所谓涉外离婚案件的管辖权问题。由于离婚或被认为涉及本国公共秩序,或被认为涉及本国公民及其家庭的利益,所以,一些国家主张对住所设在自己境内的当事人的离婚行使管辖,而另一些国家则主张只对本国公民的离婚行使管辖,并且,凡不符合     

对民事诉讼协议管辖制度的思考

民事诉讼协议管辖的概念和适用条件 以法律是强制规定还是任意规定为标准，可将管辖分为专属管辖和协议管辖。协议管辖又称合意管辖或约定管辖，是指双方当事人在合同纠纷发生之前或发生之后，以协议的方式选择解决他们之间纠纷的管辖法院，和专属管辖相对应。我国《民事诉讼法》对协议管辖的相关规定主要有：《民事诉讼法》第２５条“合同的双方当事人可以在书面合同中协议选择被告住所地、合同履行地、合同签订地、原告住所地。标的物所在地人民法院管辖，但不得违反级别管辖和专属管辖的规定”；第２４４条“涉外合同或涉外财产权益纠纷…     

最高人民法院关于加强涉外商事案件诉讼管辖工作的通知

各省、自治区、直辖市高级人民法院,解放军军事法院,新疆维吾尔自治区高级人民法院生产建设兵团分院: 最高人民法院2002年3月1日法释[2002]5号《关于涉外民商事案件诉讼管辖若干问题的规定》施行以来,各地法院认真贯彻落实,建立了涉外商事审判工作的新格局,提高了审判质量和涉外商事法官素质,为应对我国加入世界贸易组织后所面临的挑战作出了较大贡献。为进一步方便当事人诉讼,防止涉外商事案件流失,培育并充分利用司法资源, 不断提高涉外商事审判能力,现根据最高人民法院《关于涉外民商事案件诉讼管辖若干问题的规定》第一条第(四)项的规定,通知如下:     

论国际私法中协议管辖的法律效力

我国民诉法规定,涉外合同中当事人可以书面协议选择与争议有实际联系的地点的法院管辖。法律上的“实际联系”并不仅仅表现于或限于合同的签订地、履行地,双方当事人的住所地以及货源地,也表现于合同准据法的所在地。当事人选择了涉外合同关系的准据法,表明准据法所属国与合同争议有“实际联系”,从而使选择准据法所属国法院为管辖法院的约定具有法律效力     

CHOICE OF COURT AGREEMENT WITH FOREIGN ELEMENTS IN CHINA: SHANDONG JUFENG V. SOUTH KOREA MGAME

Unlike statutory and discretionary jurisdiction, jurisdiction by choice of court agreement concluded in foreign-related civil and commercial matters should be decided by the parties. As a special contract, the choice of court agreement is so independent that its validity is governed by the law chosen by the parties or by the law of the country where the chosen court is situated in case that the choice of law is invalid. Amendments to the Civil Procedure Law (hereinafter referred to as “CPL”) of People’s Republic of China (2012) should not only include the jurisdiction by choice of court agreement with foreign-related elements, but also stipulate it in a more standardized way, rather than simply refer to provision of jurisdiction by choice of court agreement in domestic cases. At the same time, the CPL should make the scope of application of choice of court agreement more clear, and provide choice of law clause and its confirmative elements when deciding its effectiveness.     

不方便法院说比较研究

“不方便法院”说是指一国法院认为某个涉外案件更适合在外国审理或者本国法院不适合审理 ,而拒不行使管辖权的一种自由裁量权。它起源于英格兰 ,后来逐渐发展成为英美国际私法上影响法院行使国际管辖权的一项重要制度。该说缺乏合理性 ,没有统一的适用标准 ,且赋予审理案件的法官过多自由裁量权 ,很容易被当事人或者法院操纵 ,往往导致适用结果的不一致。除一些普通法国家和地区外 ,其他国家都拒绝接受该说。我国法院在审理涉外案件中也不宜适用该说。     

COPARENTING ARRANGEMENTS IN A JURISDICTION WITH STATUTORY GUIDELINES

Some states have recently moved away from the traditional winner-loser model of child custody to one focused on coparenting. Under the old approach, divorce decrees typically "awarded" custody to one parent while relegating the other to a "visitor" with poorly defined status. The new system is premised on the child's need for a continuing relationship with both parents and promotes this goal by upgrading the noncustodial parent's status and time-share, assigning substantive rights and responsibilities to both parents. To give effect to the shared parenting idea, Texas adopted joint custody and statutory visitation guidelines legislatively. The policy covers all major aspects of parental rights and duties with great specificity (not just child support, for which all states must have guidelines). It applies equally to divorce and paternity cases. Judges are authorized to deviate from standard visitation guidelines but must state a rationale for doing so on request. Parties may also negotiate and agree to arrangements at variance with the guidelines, subject to approval by the court. This article describes the statutory regime in Texas and its implementation in the family court system. Based on a sample of divorce and paternity cases in the state's largest jurisdiction, it documents innovative court interventions and a wide array of coparenting and support arrangements.     

An analysis of traditional rules applied by Australian courts to establish personal jurisdiction and their application in e-commerce

This article analyses the jurisdictional principles employed by Australian courts in establishing personal jurisdiction in traditional settings and its extension to e-commerce cases. The Australian courts apply the court rules to exercise personal jurisdiction over defendants. The article discusses these rules relating to serving process within and outside Australia and jurisdiction based on the submission of the parties. The adequacies of principles like forum-non-conveniens, forum selection clauses which are vital in the personal jurisdiction inquiry are analysed. The unique High Court decision in Dow Jones v. Gutnick is discussed and the approach followed by the court critically analysed to highlight the excessive exercise of personal jurisdiction. Other cases concerning the internet are also discussed to highlight the approaches followed to establish personal jurisdiction in internet and e-commerce cases. It is argued that the drawbacks highlight the need for legislation to regulate personal jurisdiction in e-commerce cases.     

德国法院体系探析

德国特色法院体系的形成与演变有其深刻的社会历史背景,首先是文化传统,其次是经济体制,第三是工人运动。德国的法院系统由宪法法院、普通法院和专门法院三类组成。宪法法院专门审理违宪案件;普通法院只审理刑事案件和民事案件;专门法院包括(普通)行政法院、财政法院、劳动法院、社会法院、专利法院、军事法院和惩戒法院等。除了(普通)法院和宪法法院具有独立地位外,其他法院均隶属于政府有关部门。德国行政审判权由各级行政法院与劳动法院、社会法院、财政法院等共同行使。专门法院的性质介于行政机关与司法机关之间,但行政机关的性质更多(本质上属于行政司法)。     

意大利新国际私法管辖权规则初探

意大利新国际私法关于管辖权的规则具有开放、务实、灵活、高效的特征。首先 ,新法顺应国际私法法典化的新趋势 ,将涉外民商事案件的管辖权规则纳入国际私法典 ;其次 ,新法满足经济全球化的要求 ,规定住所地原则为涉外民商事管辖权的基本根据 ;再次 ,新法从实际需要出发 ,在涉外婚姻、继承案件中保留国籍作为行使管辖权的根据 ;第四 ,新法在适用国际条约方面采取更加开放的态度 ,开创了扩展适用国际条约的新举措 ;第五 ,新法更尊重协议管辖原则 ,力求增加管辖规则的灵活性 ,提高涉外民商事诉讼效率 ;最后 ,新法引入了未决诉讼制度 ,强化了对管辖权冲突的协调     

援助与纠纷解决:对印度“人民法庭”制度的考察

印度“人民法庭”为普通民众特别是社会底层民众能够接近司法提供了一个渠道.印度法律明确规定了它的组织机构、受案范围、经费来源和组织成员等.“人民法庭”具有受案范围较广、选择自愿、程序快捷、裁决终局、解决案件免费等特点,它既能对弱势群体予以法律援助也能减轻法院积案负担.鉴于印度“人民法庭”和我国人民调解有较大的相似性,其制度对我国人民调解制度的完善有一定借鉴意义.     

Human Dignity and Socio-Economic Rights

The South African Constitution numbers among a very few constitutions around the world which include justiciable socio-economic rights. One of the controversies surrounding judicial enforcement of such rights is the extent to which it is appropriate for courts to engage in policy choices in relation to the use of state resources in light of the doctrine of the separation of powers. The South African Constitutional Court has responded by developing an approach to adjudication of socio-economic rights in which the role of the court is to determine the reasonableness or otherwise of measures taken by the legislature and executive to implement such rights. However, the South African Constitution is also notable for its identification of human dignity as an underlying value and the explicit duty placed on the courts to interpret the rights protected under the Bill of Rights in conformity with this value. This article scrutinises the socio-economic rights jurisprudence of the South African Constitutional court in light of the Constitutional commitment to human dignity. It questions whether reasonableness review in socio-economic cases successfully balances human dignity with the appropriate degree of deference to the legislature and executive, in compliance with the doctrine of the separation of powers.     

On the Question of Dutch Courts' Universal Jurisdiction: A Response to Mettraux

In response to Guénaël Mettraux's article regardingthe recent exercise of universal jurisdiction over torture andwar crimes by a Dutch court, the author disputes Mettraux'sreading of these cases on several points. These points includethe legal basis for exercising universal jurisdiction over violationsof Common Article 3 and the criterion of involvement of publicauthorities in the crime of torture.