The Study On The Jurisdiction Rules Of Hague Convention On Choice Of Court Agreement

To establish international jurisdiction rules and mutual recognition and enforcement of foreign judgment mechanism at the international level has been the goal of Hague Conference on Private International Law. The Hague Convention on Choice of Court Agreements (hereinafter the Convention) concluded on June 30, 2005 is the newest result, also is genuinely the first worldwide convention on recognition and enforcement of judgments. In comparison with the originally ambitious project-a comprehensive global convention on jurisdiction and recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments in civil and commercial matters, the Convention is downsized radically into a stand-alone convention on choice of court agreements which becomes the only one of grounds of jurisdiction. However, the Convention is actually a valuable product of considerable quality-validating party autonomy, facilitating the free movement of judgments, and promoting international business Transactions smoothly. As the basis of the Convention,the jurisdiction rules are very important.Because of the growing development of the international civil and commercial business transactions, the necessity will appear gradually for China for a worldwide Convention on recognition and enforcement of judgments. However, to analyze whether China will ratify the Hague Convention, it is necessary to explore the issues of the Convention completely and thoroughly. Jurisdiction rule is the basis of the Convention, also is the premise of the recognition and enforcement of judgments.In this paper, the author analyzes the jurisdiction rule which based on the exclusive choice of court agreement,and compares the relevant content of convention and the laws of China,to examine whether there are substantial conflicts between the Convention and Chinese law, and then make analysis on the feasibility when China ratified the Convention.Besides the preface and concluding remarks, the test consists of five chapters.Entitled "An Introduction on Hague Convention on Choice of Court Agreements", Chapter 1 discusses the choice of court agreements system briefly. First it makes a brief introduction on its background, states the nature and aim of the convention, Then it analyzes its two important Theoretical bases of the system which are the Party Autonomy Principle, and Fairness Theory of adjudicatory jurisdiction, then leads to the jurisdiction rules of the Convention.The second chapter is "exclusive choice of court agreement." The reason why the Convention has greater certainty and predictability on the jurisdiction is largely due to exclusive choice of court agreements which as the basis of the Convention. This chapter introduces the concept and the effective elements of exclusive choice of court agreement, then analyze the effect and the independence of exclusive choice of court agreements.The third chapter is "jurisdiction of the chosen court." This chapter makes a analysis on the basic content of the jurisdiction of the chosen Court. First of all, it makes a brief introduction on the rights and obligations of the chosen court given by the Convention, which are the basis of the jurisdiction of the Convention, then elaborates the exclusion of other courts Convention, including "forum non conveniens" and "lis pendens" theory, which are also the assurance to the jurisdiction of the chosen court; last it analyzes the exceptions of the of Convention jurisdiction.Chapter IV is "the exclusion of a court not chosen from jurisdition".it makes a comprehensive analysis on the obligations of a court not chosen required by the Convention. It involves the obligations of a court not chosen, the relevant parties, the ways of exclusion of jurisdiction. This chapter is the system to protect the successful implementation of the first core provisions.Chapter V is the last chapter, combining our country's current legislation, it compares the relevant legislation in China and contents of conventions, and analyzes the similarities and differences between them. Though there are some differences between them, our country can reference the advantage of the Convention and modify certain provisions of our laws which not conform to the development needs of economic and social to eliminate the difference. Analyzed under the jurisdiction of the protocol point of view, China's relevant legislation, the legislative purpose and the conventions do not exist substantive conflict, which show that it is feasible for our country to ratify the Convention.