Research On The Legal Regulation Of International Parallel Litigatio

With the accelerated process of economic globalization and market internationalization,the number of transnational civil and commercial litigation has increased dramatically.The development of economic globalization requires a unified,coordinated and effective rights relief mechanism to go with it.However,the jurisdiction of international civil and commercial litigation still has a strong attribute of national sovereignty and is an integral part of a country’s independent legal system.On the one hand,litigants are increasingly inclined to choose courts among countries to find courts and laws more favorable to them than their opponents;on the other hand,national courts actively expand and compete for the jurisdiction of cases in order to safeguard their own interests.International parallel litigation is the inevitable result of the contradictory movement between law and economy in the context of globalization,and will intensify with the deepening of economic globalization and market integration.If allowed to develop,it not only brings cost and efficiency problems to the parties and courts,but also jeopardizes public trust in the judicial system,and even threatens fragile national relations and increases the diplomatic costs of the country.This dissertation takes the legal regulation of international parallel litigation as the object of study.It adopts the methods of case study,comparative study and causal analysis.It divides the traditional methods of resolving parallel litigation into two modes of regulation characterized by discretion and by time priority,using the criteria of whether to take the time priority of the court as the decisive factor.From domestic and international aspects,it conducts a comprehensive research on the legal regulation of international parallel litigation.This dissertation argues that the core issue of the legal regulation of international parallel litigation is how to maximize the concentration of parallel litigation in the same court,that is,how to determine the "more appropriate court".Through a comparative analysis of the application criteria and effects of the two existing regulation methods,this paper concludes that the "more appropriate court" should be a court that can provide fairness,justice and speedy trial to the parties,and the traditional single regulation methods cannot meet the parties’ needs for cost,efficiency and individual justice.Only through international cooperation and the technical integration of the two regulatory models is a feasible solution to effectively regulate the problem of international parallel litigation.How can the two regulatory models be effectively integrated? The Hague Conference on Private International Law Jurisdiction Project focuses on the negotiation of international parallel litigation issues,but the choice of parallel litigation regulation options is stuck in a dilemma and disagreement.This dissertation analyzes the issue of parallel litigation from the perspectives of philosophy of law,law and economics,and sociology of law,and explains what kind of parallel litigation regulation scheme is needed to build a unified,coordinated and stable international civil and commercial litigation order.It also discusses the basic features that should be met by an effective complex scheme for regulating international parallel litigation.Chinese courts and parties are also faced with the problem of international parallel litigation.In terms of legislation,the jurisdictional system of foreign-related civil litigation in China is too conservative in terms of territorial jurisdiction,too rigid in terms of agreed jurisdiction,unreasonable in terms of exclusive jurisdiction and lack of rules for coordination of foreign-related jurisdictional conflicts.Combined with the analysis of the traditional international regulation methods and the negotiation of the Hague Jurisdictional Project,we propose the suggestion of "internal reform and external opening" in order to provide new ideas and concepts for China to improve the rules of foreign-related jurisdictional coordination.