关闭

关闭

关闭

封号提示

内容

首页 国际私法。英文材料.doc

国际私法。英文材料.doc

国际私法。英文材料.doc

上传者: goodboy 2012-10-31 评分 0 0 0 0 0 0 暂无简介 简介 举报

简介:本文档为《国际私法。英文材料doc》,可适用于高等教育领域,主题内容包含第一章TheConflictsCase(必读)ManylegaldisputesarepurelylocalForinstance:whethert符等。

第一章TheConflictsCase(必读)ManylegaldisputesarepurelylocalForinstance:whetherthecontractorhasorhasnotsubstantiallyperformedwhenthelocationofaninteriorwallwasoffbysixincheswillusuallybedecidedbylocalcourtsandaccordingtolocalcontractlawIncreasingly,however,disputeswillhavea"foreignelement"Inconflictslaw,"foreign"doesnotnecessarilymeanthesameas"foreigncountry"Instead,"foreign"iseverythingwhichisnotlocalThus,forinstance,"foreign"partiesarepartiesfromanotherstateoftheUnitedStatesorfromaforeigncountrySimilarly,a"foreign"transactionisonewhichtookplaceoutsidethelocalstateForinstance,aproductmanufacturedinanotherstateorcountrymaycauseinjurylocally:thevictimwouldliketosuetolocallyratherthanhavetotravelwherethedefendanttortfeasorisAlso,thevictimwouldlike,ifpossible,tohavethecourtapplylocallaw(forinstance,becauseitprovidesforstrictliability)Assumethatthevictimdoesrecoverinhisorherhomestatebutthattheforeign(outofstate)defendantownsnopropertythere:thejudgmentcreditorwillthereforenowhavetoseekrecognitionandenforcementofthejudgmentinthedefendant'shomestate(orinanotherstatewherethereareassetsbelongingtothedefendant)ConflictsLawthushasanorderingfunction:Whenthecaseisconnectedwithmorethanonelegalsystemwhenitisaninterstateorinternationalcase,conflictslawdecideswhohasthepowertodecidethecase,accordingtowhoselawthecaseshouldbedecided,andwhattheeffectiselsewhereoftheresultingjudgmentAsageneralrule,Americanconflictslawdoesnotdifferentiatebetweeninterstateandinternationalcases:thesamerulewithrespecttojurisdiction,choiceoflaw,andtherecognitionofjudgmentsapplytobothExceptions:)Injurisdiction,theinternationalnatureofacasemaymakelitigationinanAmericancourtinappropriate)TheFullFaithandCreditClausedoesnotapplytoforeigncountryjudgments,butmoststatesaccordthosejudgmentsthesamerecognitionastheywouldtosisterstatejudgments)TheUnitedStateshasenteredintoanumberoftrartieswhichapplytointernationalcaseonlyExamples:InternationalSalesConventionCivilAspectsofInternationalChildAbductionServiceofDocumentsTakingofEvidenceAbroadConceptandtypesoftheconflictrule(必读)ThenormsindirectlyregulatingfactsofprivateinternationallawformaspecialgroupofstatutoryprovisionscalledconflictrulesOnabroaderplaneaconflictruleisunderstoodtomeananormregulatinganyconflictoflaw,towit,determiningwhichofseveralrelevantrulesistobeactuallyappliedConflictcasesmaybeinternational,whenthechoiceisbetweenthelawsofseveralsovereignStatesthenormsresolvingsuchconflictsarecalledconflictrulesoftheinternationaltypeConflictsmayalsoarisebetweendifferinglawsofnonsovereignpartsofasovereignStateBartolusandStatutists(必读)Bartolus'smethodofresolvingconflictswasbasedonasimplisticclassificationoflocallaws(statute)intotwocategories:realorpersonalRealstatuteswerethosethatoperatedonlywithintheterritoryoftheenactingstatebutnotbeyondIncontrast,personalstatutesoperatedbeyondtheterritoryoftheenactingstateandboundallpersonsthatowedallegiancetoitBartolusthoughtthatthisclassificationcouldresolveallpotentialconflictsbecauseallstatutes,bothdomesticandforeign,belongedtoeithertheoneortheothercategory,leavingneithergapsanddoubtsIndirectandDirectRegulations(必读)LegaldevelopmenthasevolvedtwomethodsofdealingwithfactsofprivateinternationallawindirectanddirectregulationBothareappliedsidebysideDistinctionismadebetweenthemaccordingtotheadoptedapproach,thewayofregulatingfactsIndirectregulationisspokenofwhenafactofprivateinternationallawisregulatedintwophases,withthehelpofrulesestablishedontwoplanes:(a)Therulesrelatedtotheselectionofthelegalsystemsthatmaybetakenintoconsideration,andtothechoiceoftheapplicablelaw,determiningwhichofthecompetingsystemsoflawistobelookedtoforarrivingatthedecisionofaconcretecaseAccordinglythefunctionofthefirstplanerulesistoresolvetheconflictofcompetinglegalsystems,togiveaguidetotheapplicablelaw,torefertothenormsgoverningthecaseTheremittingrulesarethereforecalledconflictrules,whichdesignatenothingbuttheapplicablesystemoflaw,neitherdeterminingthesubstanceofprivateinternationalcasesnorprovidinganyguidanceastotherightsanddutiesofthesubjectsofaparticularlegalrelationship(b)TherulesdesignedfortheactualsolutionofagivenrelationshiparefoundinindirectregulationandarecalledpositiverulesascontrastedwithconflictrulesTheyservetodeterminetherightsandobligationsofthesubjectsofthelegalrelationshipinvolvedTheindirectregulationofprivateinternationallawfactsconsistsinselectingtheapplicablelawaccordingtotheconflictruleonthehandandinregulatingtheparticularlegalrelationaccordingtothepositiverulesoftheapplicablelaw,ontheotherDirectregulationmeansthatthelegalnormsaredirectlyapplied,asinthecaseofdomesticfactswithonforeignconnectiontothesolutionofthelegalrelationshiponitsmerits,determiningtherightsandobligationsofthepartiesThereisnointermediatephaseofregulation,norisonenecessary,andthereisnoselectionanddesignationoftheapplicablelawThusthenormsofdirectregulationbearremittingcharacter,arenotconflictrules,butonesdirectlyestablishingthelegaleffectsofprivateinternationallawcasesTheinternationalcharacterofthesecases(theirlinkswithtwoormorelegalsystems)impliesthatthedirectregulationofsuchlegalrelationshipisonlypossiblethroughcommonoruniformlegislationbytheStates(twoormorestates)concerned,primarilybymeansofinternational(bilateralofmultilateral)agreementsConfrontedwithsuchcases,theStatesinvolvedtrytoaccommodatetheireconomicinterest,moralvalues,legaltraditions,etcandtoresolve,byacommonactlegislation,theconflictbetweentheirlegalsystemisparticulararea"Substance"VS"Procedure"Iftheforumdeterminedthatreferenceshouldbemadetoaforeignlaw,thetraditionalruleprovidesthatsuchreferenceneedonlytobeto"substantive"mattersThelawoftheforumwillgovernall"procedural"mattersAndthedeterminationofwhatis"substance"andwhatis"procedure"ismadebytheforumaccordingtoitsownstandardsThepurposeofdistinguishingbetween"substance"and"procedure"isto"drawtheline"onwhatissuestheforumisjustifiedindecidingaccordingtolocallawBecauseuniformityofresultshaslongbeenthemajorgoalofchoiceoflawmethodology,thislineshouldbedrawnsoastoencourageapplicationoftheappropriateforeignlawtothegreatestextentpossibleThus,allissuesthatmaymateriallyaffecttheoutcomeofacasehavebeenclassifiedassubstanceOntheotherhand,thehouserulesofthelitigationaspectsofthecasethatwillhavelittlebearingontheoutcomecanbegovernedbyforumlaw,forreasonsofconvenienceandpracticalityandtoinsuretheproperadministrationofjusticeRoutinemattersrelatingtoserviceofprocess,sufficiencyofpleadings,proceduralcapacityoftheparties,formsofactions,andthelikeobviouslycanbeclassifiedas"procedural"althoughtheforummaystillrefertoforeignlawonsuchmattersifitchoosesHowever,manyissues,suchasrulesofevidence,formalitiesstatuteoffrauds,timelimitationsstatuteoflimitations,measureofdamages,anddirectactionagainstinsurer,arenotsoeasilycategorizeLegislativeJurisdictionVSJudicialJurisdictionThecourtsofmanynationswillnotadjudicatecivildisputesunlesstheparties(ortheirproperty)andtheirclaimsaresubjecttotheforum's"judicialjurisdiction"or"jurisdictiontoadjudicate"Asdiscussedbelow,judicialjurisdictionincludesboth(a)thepowerofacourttorenderajudgmentagainstparticularpersonsorthings,and(b)thepowercompetenceofacourttoadjudicateparticularcategoriesofclaimsJudicialjurisdictionisdistinguishedfrom"legislative"or"prescriptive"jurisdiction,whichreferstotheauthorityofastatetomakeitslawsgenerallyapplicabletopersonsoractivitiesJudicialjurisdictionisalsodistinguishedfrom"enforcementjurisdiction"theauthorityofastatetoinduceorcompelcompliance,orpunishnoncompliance,withitslawsIntheUnitedStates,acourtcannothearadisputeunlessitpossessesboth"personal"jurisdictionoverthepartiesand"subjectmatter"jurisdictionovertheirclaimsSubjectmatterjurisdictionisthepowertoofacourttoentertainspecifiedclassesofcases,suchasanyactionbetweenpartiesofdifferingcitizenshipsAlthoughsubjectmatterandlegislativejurisdictionaresometimesconfused,thereisafundamentaldistinctionunderUSlawbetweenthetwocategoriesSubjectmatterjurisdictionisacourt'spowertohearacategoryofdisputeswithoutnecessaryregardtothesubstantiverulesthatareappliedIncontrast,legislativejurisdictiondealswiththepowerofastatetoprescribesubstantivelaw,withoutnecessaryregardtotheforuminwhichthatlawisappliedThereisalsoafundamentaldistinctionunderUSlawbetweensubjectmatterjurisdictionandpersonaljurisdictionPersonaljurisdictioninvolvesthepowerofacourttoadjudicateaclaimagainstthedefendant'spersonandtorenderajudgmentenforceableagainstthedefendantandanyofitsassetsIncontrast,subjectmatterjurisdictionreferstoacourt'spowertohearcategoriesofclaims,withoutnecessarilyconsideringtherelationshipofthepartiestoparticularcasestotheforum第二章ContractualCapacity(必读)Generally,thelawpresumesthatthepartiestoacontracthavetherequisitecontractualcapacitytoenterintothecontractHowever,certainpeopledonothavethiscapacityTheyincludeminors,insanepersons,andintoxicatedpersons()toprotectaminor,apersonwhohasnotreachedtheageofmajority,thelawrecognizestheinfancydoctrine,whichallowsminorstodisaffirm(orcancel)mostcontractstheyhaveenteredintowithadultsButifaminordoesnotdisaffirmacontracteitherduringtheperiodofminorityorwithinareasonabletimeafterreachingtheageofmajority,thecontractisconsideredratified(accepted)()toberelievedofamentalincapacity’sdutiesunderacontract,thelawrequiresapersontohavebeenlegallyinsaneatthetimeofenteringintothecontractThisiscalledLegalinsanityMoststatesusetheobjectivecognitive“understanding”testtodeterminelegalinsanityUnderthistest,theperson’smentalincapacitymustrenderthatpersonincapableofunderstandingorcomprehendingthenatureofthetransactionMereweaknessofintellect,slightpsychologicaloremotionalproblemsdonotconstitutelegalinsanityThelawhasdevelopedthefollowingtwostandardsconcerningcontractsofmentallyincompetentpersons:adjudgedinsaneandinsane,butnotadjudgedinsane()contractsenteredintobyintoxicatedpersonsarevoidablebythatpersonTheintoxicationmayoccurbecauseofalcoholordrugsTheamountofalcoholordrugsthatarenecessarytobeconsumedbyapersontobeconsideredlegallyintoxicatedtodisaffirmcontractsvariesfromcasetocaseThefactorsthatareconsideredincludetheuser’sphysicalcharacteristicsandhisorherabilityto“hold”intoxicantsTheDoctrineofSovereignImmunity(必读)OneoftheoldestprinciplesofinternationallawisthedoctrineofsovereignimmunityUnderthisdoctrine,countriesaregrantedimmunityfromsuitsincourtsinothercountriesOriginally,theUnitedStatesgratedabsoluteimmunitytoforeigngovernmentsfromsuitsinUScourtsIn,theUnitedStatesswitchedtotheprincipleofqualifiedorrestrictedimmunity,whichwaseventuallycodifiedintheForeignSovereignImmunityActof(FSIA)ThisactnowexclusivelygovernssuitsagainstforeignnationsintheUnitedStates,whetherinfederalorstatecourtMostWesternnationshaveadoptedtheprincipleofrestrictedimmunityOthercountiesstillfollowthedoctrineofabsoluteimmunityTheFSIAprovidesthataforeigncountryisnotimmunefromlawsuitsinUScourtsinthefollowingtwosituations:()Theforeigncountryhaswaiveditsimmunity,eitherexplicitlyorbyimplication()TheactionisbaseduponacommercialactivitycarriedonintheUnitedStatesbytheforeigncountryorcarriedonoutsidetheUnitedStatesbutcausingadirecteffectintheUnitedStatesWhatconstitutes"commercialactivity"isthemostlitigatedaspectoftheFSIAIfitiscommercialactivity,theforeignsovereignissubjecttosuitintheUnitedStatesifitisnot,theforeignsovereignisimmunefromsuitinthiscountryTheNationalTreatmentclause(必读)TheNationalTreatmentobligationoftheGATT,liketheMFNobligation,isaruleofnondiscriminationInthecaseofMFN,theobligationprohibitsdiscriminationasbetweenthesamegoodsfromdifferentexportingcountriesThenationaltreatmentclause,incontrast,imposestheprincipleofnondiscriminationasbetweendomesticallyproducedgoodsandthesameimportedgoodsItisacentralfeatureofinternationaltraderulesandpolicy,andexistswithintheGATTsystemtopreventgovernmentpracticeswhichevadethetariffobligationsArticleⅢisthecentralnationaltreatmentobligationoftheGeneralAgreement,whichestablishesthegeneralprinciplethatinternaltaxesandregulations"shouldnotbeapplied…soastoaffordprotectiontodomesticproduction"TheMFNprinciple(必读)Theunconditionalmostfavorednation(MFN)provisionisthecornerstoneoftheinternationaltraderulesembodiesintheGeneralAgreementonTariffandTrade(GATT)ThebasicrationaleforMFNisthatifeverycountryobservestheprinciple,allcountrieswillbenefitinthelongrunthroughtheresultingmoreefficientuseofresourcesFurthermore,iftheprincipleisobserved,thereislesslikelihoodoftradedisputesMFNhassometimesbeendescribedasthe"central"policyofGATTandthepostWordWarⅡtradingsystemThefactthatitisArticleⅠofGeneralAgreementreinforcesthatposition“…anyadvantage,favor,privilege,orimmunitygrantedbyanycontractingpartytoanyproductoriginatinginordestinedforanyothercountryshallbeaccordedimmediatelyandunconditionallytothelikeproductoriginatinginordestinedfortheterritoriesofallothercontractingparties”Theprinciplemustbeapplied“unconditionally”Thismeans,forinstance,thatastatecaninvokemostfavoredtreatmentwithoutgrantinginturnsomeadvantageInotherwords,theprincipleisnotbasedonreciprocity第二章ThenameofsubjectTheterm“ConflictofLaws”describesgenerallythebodyoflawdealingwiththequestionsofwhenandwhythecourtsofonejurisdictiontakeintoconsiderationtheelementsofforeignlaworfactpatternsinacaseorconsiderthepriordeterminationofanotherstateorofaforeignnationinacasependingbeforethem“ConflictofLaws”isthetermprimarilyusedintheUnitedStates,CanadaandmorerecentlyinEngland,whiletheContinentalcountries,andsomewritersinEngland,atleastsincethewritingofWestlake,referto“privateinternationallaw”Neithertermisfullydescriptive“Privateinternationallaw”mightconnotethatthesubjectsomehowinthecontextofprivatedisputespartakesofthegeneral“lawofnations,”publicinternationallaw,thatis,ageneralbodyoflawfortheorderingofaffairsbetweennationsaboutwhichthereexistsacertainconsensusRulesofconflictsoflaw,orofprivateinternationallaw,however,relatetolegalissuesbetweenprivatepersonsanddonotemanatefromaninternationalconsensus,suchas“customary(public)internationallaw”Insteadtheyarepartofeachstateornation’sdomesticlawandthereforeoftendifferfromonejurisdictiontoanotherIntheUnitedStates,moreover,conflictsrulesareprimarilystatelaw,albeitsubjecttosomeimportantfederalconstitutional,treaty,andstatutoryconstraints,withtheresultthattheymaycomeintoplaybothininterstate(statestate)andinternationalsituations(stateforeignnation)Noristheterm“ConflictofLaws”anentirelyaccuratedescriptionforitsuggeststhatlaws“conflict”and,byhypothesis,thatthereisamechanismfortheresolutionoftheconflictTostatethatlaws“conflict”seemstoassumetheexistenceoflawsofequalapplicabilityItisnotuncommontosaythatthesubstantiverulesofdecisionoftwostatesrelatedtoatransactionare“inconflict”whentherearecircumstanceswhichapparentlyjustifytheapplicationofthelawofeitherstateHowever,sinceconflictsrulesaredomesticlawaforeignrulewillinfluencetheresultonlyifsoviewedbytheforumEitherthedomesticsubstantiveruleortheforeignsubstantiverulewillbeinfluentialbyreasonoftheconflictoflawsruleorapproachoftheforumhence,thetwosubstantivelawswillnotbe“equallyapplicable”andin“conflict”Italsofollowsfromthenatureofconflictslawasstatelawthatthereisnomechanismofsuperiorauthorityfortheresolutionof“conflicts,”instead,theaccommodationofconflictingreasonsfortheapplicationoflocalorforeignlaw(sisterstateorforeignnation)mustbeworkedoutandprovidedbytheforumitselfaccordingtoitsownviewofconflictoflawsNevertheless,theterminologyiswellestablished,bothintheUnitedStatesand(asprivateinternationallaw)inothercountries,andwillthereforebemaintainedhere,eventhoughotherterms(suchas“lawofmultistateortransnationalproblems”)mightbetechnicallymoredescriptivelyaccurateThesourcesofprivateinternationallawincludecustomarystatute(written)lawInadditiontowrittenlaw,customarylawhasretainedanextremelyimportantroleallovertheworldMorecomprehensiveworksofcodificationdidnotappearexceptitthepasthundredyears,andthesignificanceofcustomarylawintheregulationofprivateinternationallawcasesisgenerallygreaterthaninotherareasofthelegalsystemThepracticeofcourtsandotherlawenforcementagenciesisthebasicsourceofprivateinternationallawinmostcountriesInternationalcommercialusagesarealsoofgreatsignificanceinthelawoftransactions,buttheyarenotregardedassourceoflawexceptwhenandwhereanappropriateinternationalusageis,expresslyorbyimplication,recognizedorsanctionedbytheStateconcernedAgroupofwrittenprivateinternationallawsourceisfoundinthenormsofdomesticlaw,suchasspecialenactments,comprehensiveprovisionsofcivilcodes,orprovisionsonpartialaspects,preambularprovisionsofcivilcodesorenactinglegislationsandorseveralotherenactmentsAnothergroupofwrittenprivateinternationallawsourceismadeupofinternationalagreementswhich,intheirorigin,aresourceofaninternationalcharacterandbecomepartofdomesticlawthroughappropriateconstitutionalproceduresTheinternationalagreementscontainingconflictnormsorsubstantivelawrulesformaspecialclassandcanbewellseparatedfrominternationalagreementsthatcreateno

热点搜索换一换

用户评论(0)

0/200

精彩专题

上传我的资料

每篇奖励 +2积分

资料评价:

/43
1下载券 下载 加入VIP, 送下载券

意见
反馈

立即扫码关注

爱问共享资料微信公众号

返回
顶部