This thesis critically analyses the Australian law of jurisdiction in private international litigation. Jurisdiction in international litigation is often regarded as a procedural area of law which is less important than choice of law in practical and theoretical terms. There has been little scholarly attention devoted specifically to the study of jurisdiction in Australia. In recent years, jurisdiction has certainly overtaken choice of law in practical importance. This emphasises the need for critical academic study of the law of jurisdiction. This thesis addresses this need. It critically analyses the present principles and the manner in which they are applied, identifies the factors which should influence the law, and proposes appropriate reforms to the principles. This thesis is in five related parts. The first part examines the procedural and constitutional context in which the principles of jurisdiction have been developed and applied. This context has important implications for the law and practice of jurisdiction, which have largely been overlooked in the literature, although they are important in understanding how the principles have developed and how they are applied. The second part critically analyses the present law of jurisdiction. The Australian principles of jurisdiction have not changed substantially in the last 100 years, while economic and social conditions which affect international litigation have undergone dramatic and wide-reaching changes. The present law provides that the courts are jurisdictionally competent in a wide range of cases, which do not all require a substantial connection between the dispute and the forum. The various principles applied in declining jurisdiction make it likely that the Australian courts will exercise their discretion to retain jurisdiction in the majority of cases. Foreign jurisdictional agreements should be enforced by a stay unless there are strong reasons for non- enforcement. But the application of overriding mandatory rules, even where there is a jurisdictional agreement, and the courts' wide discretion under the Australian forum non conveniens principle make it unlikely that the courts will decline to exercise jurisdiction. The present principles, in short, permit the courts to take jurisdiction in too many cases, and require them to decline to exercise jurisdiction in too few cases. The third part examines how the principles on declining jurisdiction operate in practice. This is addressed by a doctrinal and an empirical analysis of the manner in which these principles are applied by the Australian superior courts. These analyses identify factors which appear to influence decisions in practice, not all of which are consistent with the applicable principles. For example, the principle requires the court to enforce foreign jurisdictional agreements unless there are strong grounds for non-enforcement. In practice, strong grounds are easily shown. These analyses show that there are factors which influence decisions which are not always apparent from the principles, suggesting that reform is required. The fourth part identifies the factors which ought to influence the law and practice of jurisdiction. The relevant factors are identified in terms of the interests of foreign states, individual litigants' interests and the forum state's interests. The law and practice of jurisdiction are examined to determine whether those interests do in fact influence law and practice. Many important interests, especially of foreign states and of defendants, are not sufficiently taken into account. This also implies that reform of the principles is warranted. The fifth part considers how Australian jurisdictional principles could be improved. Detailed reforms are suggested, drawing on a discussion and an evaluation of different approaches to jurisdiction, particularly drawing on the European Community's Regulation on Jurisdiction and Judgments. The principles should ensure that the court is jurisdictionally competent only where it is likely to be an appropriate forum for the dispute. The proposed reforms identlfy grounds of exclusive jurisdiction, provide protection to weaker parties to contracts, and otherwise require the enforcement of jurisdictional agreements. Default rules of jurisdiction which are likely to indicate a strong connection between the forum and the dispute are proposed. Specific principles for declining jurisdiction are also proposed. Retention of the forum non conveniens principle is recommended, but the English principle is advocated as a more suitable and just approach. This thesis is intended to contribute both to a theoretical understanding of this area of law and to an understanding of its practical application.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:ADTP/195208 |
| Date | January 2004 |
| Creators | Keyes, Mary Elizabeth, n/a |
| Publisher | Griffith University. Griffith Law School |
| Source Sets | Australiasian Digital Theses Program |
| Language | English |
| Detected Language | English |
| Rights | http://www.gu.edu.au/disclaimer.html), Copyright Mary Elizabeth Keyes |
Page generated in 0.0022 seconds