LL.M. (International Commercial law) / The primary objective of this thesis is not to question or investigate the existence of this doctrine but it attempts to illustrate the application of the doctrine of forum non conveniens in different jurisdictions, namely South Africa and the United Kingdom, as well as the position if the Brussels I Regulation applies. The objective is also to provide a comprehensive relative review of the doctrine of forum non conveniens, looking into both the history of the doctrine as well as the possibilities for the future development of the doctrine.1 A further aim is to see whether the doctrine is being applied correctly in the right situations and that, when it is applied, it does not lead to judicial abuse. The doctrine of forum non conveniens is applied exclusively in the common law countries such as the United States, the United Kingdom, Australia and Canada; it is not recognized in most civil law countries. The doctrine is applied differently in these nations. This doctrine applies between courts in different countries and between courts in different jurisdictions in the same country. It provides a flexible device to serve the forum states policy objectives and, in practice, it has been rather resistant to abuse.

A new legal phenomenon has emerged in recent years, as plaintiffs from developing countries have begun to initiate civil proceedings against multinational corporations in the courts where these companies have their headquarters. These suits have typically claimed damages for personal injuries arising from the multinationals' activities in a developing country. While the doctrine of forum non conveniens blocked many of the earlier attempts by plaintiffs to seek justice overseas, courts are increasingly refusing to dismiss these cases to ensure the interests of justice are served. The purpose of this thesis will be to compare the application of forum non conveniens to these cases in Canada, with the approaches in the U.K., the U.S. and Australia. The thesis concludes that Canadian courts have the jurisdiction to consider civil claims against a resident for extraterritorial harm and that this jurisdiction can be appropriately exercised where the foreign plaintiff is not likely to receive justice in the alternative forum. Precedents from the U.K., the U.S. and Australia, where courts have already accepted such jurisdiction, will also be examined for their relevance in Canada.

No description available.

Selon une présentation classique, la compétence juridictionnelle n’aurait en droit international privé pour objet que de déterminer les hypothèses dans lesquelles l’Etat accepterait de mettre ses juridictions à disposition des justiciables. Cette présentation achoppe cependant sur deux évolutions du droit positif. D’une part, la réglementation de la compétence est en bonne partie internationalisée, et ne suis plus ce modèle. D’autre part, elle occulte le fort développement des juridictions non étatiques instituées pour le contentieux de droit privé et économique dont l’intervention est souvent articulée avec celle des juridictions étatiques comme la compétence le fait en droit interne.Ce double handicap descriptif s’explique par la place que l’Etat conserve au coeur de la théorie classique, une place héritée des théories publicistes du début du XXe siècle. Or, ni l’évolution de la théorie générale du droit international privé, ni surtout le droit positif ne justifie plus cette place centrale de l’Etat. Il faut donc revoir la théorie de la compétence internationale à l’aune du problème presque factuel auquel elle répond, la concurrence internationale des juridictions, et ainsi réintégrer en son sein les règles qui participent de sa résolution en organisant cette concurrence. La théorie renouvellée permet alors d’observer plus complètement l’organisation de la justice internationale de droit économique. Elle autorise en outre des propositions pour un régime plus efficace ou plus souple de la compétence internationale selon que cette concurrence internationale est ordonnée par une règlementation uniforme ou qu’il s’agit seulement de coopérer. / French private international law doctrine classicaly defines judicial jurisdiction as the branch of law that deals with describing the hypothesis under which the State makes its courts available to claimants in international matters. This presentation, though, faces two contradicting evolutions in modern-day litigation of international business matters. First, it does give no account of the increasing internationalization of this branch of law, where numerous international conventions and European regulations now regulates judicial jurisdiction between judges of different countries as they would with venue between judges of the same State. Second, this presentation ignores the development of international courts and arbitral tribunals even though these tribunals compete with or replace national courts in international business disputes.The reason for this double exclusion may actually be found in an analytical bias inherited from a century-old description of private international law as a conflict of State regulations, a bias that neither modern theory nor law itself confirms in any way. More simply described according to the problem it resolves, judicial jurisdiction may be defined as the branch of law that deals with organizing the international competition of judges. Under this functional definition, it is possible to broaden its scope and to describe the organization of international justice for business matters, both public and private, both State and International. Also, then encompassing rules of procedure, it becomes possible to offer new solutions to take into account foreign jurisdiction for a better international cooperation.

Abstract not available

No description available.

Dans la nouvelle ère de la mondialisation, les règles du droit international privé sont passées de la rigidité à la flexibilité, et la tendance à la modernisation et à la codification a commencé à fusionner. Toutefois, pour des raisons historiques, les systèmes juridiques de la plupart des pays asiatiques sont moins développés que ceux des pays occidentaux. Afin de répondre à la demande croissante de relations civiles et commerciales internationales, le droit international privé asiatique doit être amélioré. Lorsque des différends internationaux sont soumis à la Cour, la compétence est la première question que celle - ci doit examiner. Dans la pratique des procédures internationales, le demandeur, afin d'obtenir de meilleurs résultats, soumet le différend au tribunal compétent, généralement dans son pays de résidence. Afin de réduire au minimum les intérêts du demandeur, le défendeur soumettra le différend à ses tribunaux nationaux. Par conséquent, une procédure parallèle entre les deux tribunaux entraînerait un conflit de compétence. En Amérique du Nord, dans l'Union Européenne et au Royaume - Uni, les mécanismes de traitement des litiges parallèles sont plus développés et devancent les pays asiatiques. La présente étude fournit donc une évaluation objective et complète des systèmes juridiques des pays asiatiques, à savoir la Chine, la Corée du Sud et le Japon, qui traitent des litiges internationaux parallèles. Par rapport aux États - Unis, au Canada, à l'Union Européenne, au Royaume - Uni et à d'autres pays développés, cette thèse vise à trouver une voie favorable au développement du droit international privé Chinois et à promouvoir l'unification des règles de compétence civile internationale. Tout d'abord, la Chine devrait continuer à améliorer la législation sur le forum non conveniens, et à assouplir les exigences trop strictes. Deuxièmement, la Chine devrait mettre en oeuvre la pratique judiciaire du droit de la propriété intellectuelle en matière d'injonction reconventionnelle de cesser de poursuivre à l'étranger dans la législation ou l'interprétation judiciaire, en limitant strictement les conditions et la portée de son application. Troisièmement, il est suggéré d'adopter un système à double modes pour la litipendance et d'inclure la première saisie et le pronostic de reconnaissance dans la condition de tribunal première saisie. Quatrièmement, il convient d'élargir le champ d'application de l'accord d'élection de for, d'en réduire progressivement les restrictions en ce qui concerne les liens matériels, les moyens écrits, la compétence, et d'y inclure le principe de la protection des droits et intérêts des faibles. Afin de mieux intégrer les tribunaux Chinois sur le marché international des tribunaux facultatifs, la Chine devrait promouvoir activement le processus de ratification de la Convention de la Haye de 2005 sur l'accord d'élection de for. Cinquièmement, dans le domaine de la reconnaissance et de l'exécution, la Chine conciliera les exigences de réciprocité au niveau de l'exécution et encouragera les procédures de reconnaissance. La politique de réciprocité de la Chine à ce stade est relativement conservatrice. Elle met davantage l'accent sur la protection de la souveraineté nationale que sur la promotion de la circulation des jugements internationaux. La Chine doit donc passer progressivement de la réciprocité matérielle à la réciprocité formelle et traiter les jugements étrangers avec plus d'ouverture d'esprit. Enfin, la Chine devrait promouvoir activement le processus d'adhésion à la Convention de la Haye de 2019. / In this new Era of globalization, the rules of Private International Law change from rigid to flexible, and the trends of modernization and codification begin to merge. The legal systems in a majority of Asian countries, however, are not as well developed as western countries due to historical reasons. To meet the increasing demands of international civil and commercial relationship, Asian Private International law has to be ameliorated. Jurisdiction is the first subject that a court must deal with when an international dispute is submitted before it. In the practice of international litigation, the plaintiff will bring dispute before his favorable court, usually in his resident country, in order to get a better result. To minimize the advantage of the plaintiff, the defendant will submit the dispute to a court in his own resident country. Therefore, the parallel proceedings running between these two courts will cause conflict of jurisdictions. In North America, the EU and the U.K., mechanisms dealing with parallel proceedings are more developed and are keeping ahead of Asian countries. Hence, this research provides an objective and comprehensive assessment of legal system dealing with international parallel proceedings in Asian countries, namely China, Korea and Japan. Through comparing them with the developed countries, such as the United States, Canada, the EU and the U.K., this thesis aims at finding a way to benefit the development of Chinese Private International Law, and to promote the unification of rules in international civil jurisdiction. This thesis proposes that, firstly, China should continue to improve the legislation of forum non conveniens, supplement and improve the definition of “more convenient court”, and relax the requirements that are too harsh. Secondly, China should implement the breakthrough judicial practice of intellectual property law on anti-suit injunction in the legislation or judicial interpretation, and strictly limit its application conditions and scope. Thirdly, it is suggested to adopt a dual mode system for lis pendens, and integrate first seized and recognition prognosis into the provisions of lis pendens in China. Fourthly, in terms of the choice of court agreement, we should expand its scope of application, reduce the restrictions on the choice of court agreement concerning substantive connection, “written method” and jurisdiction by level, and integrate the principle of protecting the rights and interests of the weak party into it. In order to better integrate Chinese courts into the international market of optional courts, China should actively promote the process of ratifying the 2005 Convention on the Choice of Court Agreement. Fifthly, in the field of recognition and enforcement, China in this regard is to reconcile the requirement of reciprocity at the enforcement level and facilitate the recognition procedure. China’s reciprocity at this stage is relatively conservative. It focuses more on the protection of national sovereignty rather than promoting the circulation of international judgments. Therefore, China needs to slowly transit from substantive reciprocity to formal reciprocity, and deal with foreign judgments with a more open mind. Finally, China should actively promote the process of acceding to the 2019 Judgment Convention.

Les répercussions de la crise économique et politique que le Liban connait aujourd’hui ne se sont pas limitées à ses frontières. Un nombre très important d’individus résidants à l’extérieur de ce pays ont été touchés directement depuis le début de la crise. En effet, depuis octobre 2019, toute personne détenant des dépôts auprès des banques commerciales libanaises se voit refuser l’accès à ces fonds, surtout pour les transferts internationaux. Ces mesures mises en place par les banques commerciales représentent, en l'absence de législation appropriée, un contrôle des capitaux de facto dépourvu de toute légalité aux yeux du droit libanais. Compte tenu de la corruption qui ravage les institutions étatiques et des interférences politiques dans l’appareil judiciaire libanais, un recours depuis le Liban s’avère impossible aujourd’hui pour les déposants étrangers. Ces derniers recherchent désespérément un forum compétent afin d’exercer leurs droits dans l’espoir de récupérer un jour leurs économies investies dans les banques libanaises. De ces déposants, un nombre important réside au Québec. Ce groupe de personnes a subi un préjudice commun susceptible d’engendrer des litiges similaires. Ainsi se pose la question traitée par ce mémoire. En ce qui concerne les déposants québécois, et en considérant les objectifs de l’action collective québécoise, cette procédure pourrait-elle satisfaire leurs besoins d’accès à la justice? Afin de répondre à cette question, plusieurs problématiques se posent. Notamment, la compétence des tribunaux québécois de se saisir de ce litige, la satisfaction de ce dernier aux critères d’autorisation de l’action collective et les difficultés inhérentes à cette procédure dans le contexte factuel particulier. Ainsi, le lecteur comprendra, ce mémoire aura l’aspect d’une étude de cas pratique hypothétique. Toutefois, les enjeux juridiques seront traités en détail et de manière exhaustive. L’objectif principal demeure la faisabilité de ce recours selon le droit positif québécois. / The repercussions of the economic and political crisis that Lebanon is experiencing today are not limited to its borders. A very large number of individuals residing outside this country have been directly affected since the beginning of this crisis. Indeed, since October 2019, any person holding deposits in Lebanese commercial banks has been denied access to these funds, especially in the case of international transfers. These measures put in place by the commercial banks represent a de facto capital control that is, absent appropriate legislation, illegal under Lebanese law. Given the corruption that plagues state institutions and the political interference in the Lebanese judiciary, recourse from Lebanon is impossible today for foreign depositors. These account holders are desperately seeking a competent forum to exercise their rights in the hope of one day recovering their savings invested in Lebanese banks. Of these depositors, a large number resides in Quebec. This group of people have suffered a common prejudice that could lead to similar litigation. This raises the question addressed by this thesis. With respect to Quebec plaintiffs and considering the objectives of the Quebec class action, could this procedure satisfy their need for access to justice? In order to answer this question, several elements must be considered. In particular, the jurisdiction of the Quebec courts to hear this case, whether it meets the criteria for certification of a class action and the difficulties inherent to this procedure considering the peculiar factual context. Thus, the reader will understand that this thesis will have the aspect of a hypothetical practical case study. However, the legal issues will be dealt with in detail and in a comprehensive manner. The main objective remains to determine the feasibility of this recourse within the framework of Quebec's positive law.

Submitted by Silvana Teresinha Dornelles Studzinski (sstudzinski) on 2016-08-22T19:26:32Z No. of bitstreams: 1 Vanessa de Oliveira Bernardi_.pdf: 856516 bytes, checksum: af8c7978683b7dce5f35c4a6b769a1d5 (MD5) / Made available in DSpace on 2016-08-22T19:26:33Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Vanessa de Oliveira Bernardi_.pdf: 856516 bytes, checksum: af8c7978683b7dce5f35c4a6b769a1d5 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2016-06-27 / Nenhuma / Diante da concorrência de jurisdição entre dois ou mais países herdadas das facilidades advindas da globalização, o presente trabalho possui o objetivo de responder, principalmente a dois questionamentos: a) é possível à adoção da doutrina do forum non conveniens como um princípio comum a fim de harmonizar as normas de processo civil e evitar a ocorrência da litispendência internacional e do forum shopping; b) até que ponto o Instituto Internacional para Unificação do Direito Privado (UNIDROIT) e a Conferência de Haia sobre Direito Internacional Privado (HCCH), principais órgãos unificadores processuais, são adequados para, ao mesmo tempo, garantir um pluralismo jurídico e assegurar uma aproximação entre os diferentes sistemas. Assim, o estudo apresenta a teoria do pluralismo ordenado proposta pela jurista francesa Mireille Delmas-Marty, onde destaca-se a noção de mundialização do Direito e um certo número de técnicas para a coordenação de diferentes sistemas legais, tais como a Coordenação por entrecruzamento, da Harmonização por Aproximação e da Unificação por Hibridação. Num segundo momento, serão abordados os dois principais problemas decorrentes da concorrência de jurisdição; o forum shopping e a litispendência internacional. Ao final, serão estudados dois órgãos de unificação do Direito Internacional Privado, o UNIDROIT e a HCCH com a finalidade de averiguar se o método de trabalho utilizado pelos órgãos respeita a pluralidade jurídica existente. Por último, estudar-se-á a doutrina do forum non conveniens, a fim de analisar a possibilidade de inserção desta como um meio de harmonizar as normas processuais, abordando-se, também as alterações propostas à doutrina pela House of Lords Inglesa, a qual demonstra uma maior possibilidade de ser adotada como um princípio comum, avaliando-se se esta seria capaz de respeitar o pluralismo jurídico existente. A metodologia utilizada neste trabalho foi de natureza qualitativa, utilizando-se principalmente um levantamento bibliográfico, de jurisprudências nacionais e a análise de casos provenientes do sistema jurídico do common law. / Considering the competing jurisdiction of two or more countries arising from the conveniences brought by globalization, the present research is intended to answer mainly two questions: (i) it is possible to adopt the forum non conveniens doctrine as a common principle to harmonize the rules of civil procedure and prevent the occurrence of international lis pendens and forum shopping; (ii) to which extent the International Institute for the Unification of Private Law (UNIDROIT) and the Hague Conferences on Private International Law (HCCH), the two major procedural unifying institutions, are suitable to ensure legal pluralism and bring different systems closer at the same time. Thus, firstly the study presents the ‘ordered pluralism theory’ proposed by the French jurist Mireille Delmas-Marty, which comprises the idea legal internationalization and a number of techniques for coordinating differing legal systems such as ‘inter-crossing’, ‘harmonization through proximity’ and ‘unification through hybridization’. Subsequently, the two main problems arising from competing jurisdiction – forum shopping and the international lis pendens – will be addressed. Then, the two unification institutions of private international law before mentioned – UNIDROIT and HCCH – will be studied to determine whether the working method used by such bodies respect the existing legal pluralism. At the end, the doctrine of forum non conveniens will be discussed so that the possibility of including it as a means of harmonizing the existing procedural rules is examined. For this matter, the alterations proposed by the English House of Lords will be assessed in order to confirm that they respect the existing legal pluralism, as they indicate a greater chance for the forum non conveniens doctrine being adopted as a common principle. The methodology used in this research is of a qualitative nature, mainly basing itself on specialized literature, national jurisprudence and on common law case studies.

Bryssel I-förordningens behörighetsregler är inte tillämpliga på svarande från tredje land. I sådana fall hänvisar förordningen till nationell rätt (s.k. restkompetens). Inom EU varierar de nationella behörighetsreglerna med avseende på svarande som har hemvist utanför EU avsevärt mellan medlemsstaterna, vilket ibland kan leda till orimliga konsekvenser. Syftet med denna uppsats är att beskriva vilka internationellt privat- och processrättsliga (IPP) problem som kan uppkomma till följd av nuvarande regelverk samt analysera kommissionens förslag till införandet av en regel om reservforum (s.k. forum necessitatis). För att ge läsaren tillräcklig bakgrund för analysen beskrivs rättsläget vad gäller forum necessitatis ur både ett svenskt och EU-rättsligt perspektiv. Resultatet av denna framställning är att förslaget till införandet av en regel om forum necessitatis bidrar till en ökad rättssäkerhet och förutsägbarhet. Den föreslagna regeln har dock en del brister som gör att bestämmelsen bör revideras. / The jurisdiction rules of the Brussels I-Regulation do not apply for third country defendants. In these cases refers the Regulation to national law (so-called residual jurisdiction). The national rules on the jurisdiction for defendants domiciled outside the EU vary widely between Member States, which can lead to undue hardship in some cases. The purpose of this thesis is to describe the private international law issues that may arise as a result of the current set of regulations and then analyze the Commission’s proposal to the creation of a forum of necessity (so-called forum necessitatis). In order to provide the reader with enough background information for the analysis the legal position regarding forum necessitatis is described from both a Swedish and European legal perspective. The result of this thesis is that the proposed solution would increase legal certainty and predictability. The proposed rule has some shortcomings that imply that the provision should be revised.