Forum shopping in the European judicial area
著者
書誌事項
Forum shopping in the European judicial area
(Studies of the Oxford Institute of European and Comparative Law, v. 7)
Hart, 2007
大学図書館所蔵 全8件
  青森
  岩手
  宮城
  秋田
  山形
  福島
  茨城
  栃木
  群馬
  埼玉
  千葉
  東京
  神奈川
  新潟
  富山
  石川
  福井
  山梨
  長野
  岐阜
  静岡
  愛知
  三重
  滋賀
  京都
  大阪
  兵庫
  奈良
  和歌山
  鳥取
  島根
  岡山
  広島
  山口
  徳島
  香川
  愛媛
  高知
  福岡
  佐賀
  長崎
  熊本
  大分
  宮崎
  鹿児島
  沖縄
  韓国
  中国
  タイ
  イギリス
  ドイツ
  スイス
  フランス
  ベルギー
  オランダ
  スウェーデン
  ノルウェー
  アメリカ
注記
Text in English and French
Includes indexes
内容説明・目次
内容説明
One of the issues left untouched by the Brussels Convention of 27 September 1968 (and by the Brussels-1 Regulation replacing it) concerns the leeway left to domestic courts when applying European rules on international jurisdiction in civil and commercial matters. For instance, is the court under a duty of strict compliance with the jurisdiction rule as it is drafted? Would such a duty go so far as to require the court to abide by the jurisdiction rule, even though it is being used by one of the litigants to achieve an unfair result, for example to delay adjudication on the merits? Under what conditions may the Court decline jurisdiction on account of any unsuitable forum shopping, thus ruling out the European provision on jurisdiction? Recent litigation in the ECJ has yielded rather, even excessively, restrictive answers, ruling out any discretion by domestic courts to remedy any inconvenience arising from the strict application of the European provisions, if such discretion were provided for by the lex fori (the Gasser case, the Turner case, and the Owusu case). This series of rulings from the ECJ raises several questions.
Most observers have questioned the appropriateness of prescribing a blind application of European rules on jurisdiction by domestic courts, relying on the legal traditions of EC Member States usually providing for corrective mechanisms - such as 'forum non conveniens' in English Law and 'exception de fraude' in French Law - in cases when a party abusively triggers the jurisdiction of a court in order to obtain an unjust advantage, thus practising unacceptable forum shopping. The time has now come for an analysis, under both Community and comparative law, of the ramifications of the recent Gasser/Turner/Owusu cases. Readers will find in this book a collection of studies by some of the leading English and French experts today, analysing the ins and outs of jurisdiction and forum shopping in Europe.
目次
Introduction
Edwin Peel
Part I The Gasser Case: the Fate of Jurisdiction Clauses in Case of Lis Pendens
1. Parallel Proceedings and Jurisdiction Agreements in Europe
Richard Fentiman
2. The Enforcement of Jurisdiction Agreements Further to Gasser and the Community Principle of Abuse of Right
Arnaud Nuyts
Part II The Turner Case: The Prohibition on Anti-suit Injunctions
3. Le Principe de Confiance Mutuelle et Les Injonctions Anti-Suit
Marie-Laure Niboyet
4. The Prohibition on Anti-Suit Injunctions and the Relationship Between European Rules on Jurisdiction and Domestic Rules on Procedure
Alexander Layton
Part III The OwusuCase: The Rejection of the 'Forum Non Conveniens'
5. The Mandatory Nature of Article 2 of the Brussels Convention and Derogation from the Rule It Lays Down
Pascal de Vareilles-Sommieres
6. Legal Certainty and the Brussels Convention - Too Much of a Good Thing?
Andrew Dickinson
7. Forum non conveniens et Application Uniforme des Regles de Competence
Pierre Mayer
Conclusion
Horatia Muir Watt
「Nielsen BookData」 より