Discussion On The International Parallel Proceedings

The more international civil and commercial activities happened, the more international parallel litigation happened. Each country has its own regulations on this problem, and the parties always reluctant to give up the rights about forum shopping, so the international parallel litigation become complicated. The parallel litigation not only concerning private interests, but also relating to judicial sovereignty, it will cause inconvenience to the recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments, even arises conflicts between different countries. The new civil and commercial order shall be influenced as well. Both international treaties and practice are lacking in this area.This thesis is composed of 6 sections, covers the definition of international parallel litigation, the reasons, analysis about the benefits, the domestic regulating patterns of parallel litigation, the international practice to settle the problem, and relative practice and system consummation in China.The first 3 sections are about the basic problem about international parallel litigation. Including the definition, the reasons, the analysis about the benefits. In the definition, there are introductions about the definition regulated in China and other countries, in the treaties, and give the appropriate criteria at last. The positive conflict of international civil jurisdiction among different countries is the ultimate reason. The parties strive for their own interests is the immediate reason. Lacking of international regulations is another important reason. The third section made both positive and negative analysis about the benefit made by the international parallel litigation.The fourth section is about the domestic regulating patterns of parallel litigation. The domestic regulating patterns shall be divided into 3 types, passive regulating approach, interest balancing approach, recognition prognosis. The passive regulating approach will invade the judicial sovereignty, more and more countries have changed this pattern recently. Countries like the US applied the interest balancing approach with the forum non convenience, lis alibi pendens, International Comity, anti-suit injunction. The continental countries, such as Germany, Switzerland, Belgium, applied the recognition prognosis. The fifth section is about the treaties. The parallel litigation can not be solved only by each county, but shall be seemed as a problem through the world, then it may be got an appropriate resolution. In this section, bilateral treaties and multilateral treaties will be found. We can find out the defects and rationality in the regulations, serve as the basement for the further research and practice.The last section is about relative practice and system consummation in China. There isn't unambiguous regulation relating to the international parallel litigation. New development has appearing recently. The standpoint in our legislation and practice is different from that in the bilateral treaties. In this section, we will pay more attention to the Model Law of Private International Law, and put forward suggestions to the establishment of the legal system about international parallel litigation, including the following five methods:drawing up the principle of initially accepting a case and recognition prognosis, forum non convenience principle, regulating the contractual jurisdiction, prescribing the exclusive jurisdiction, concluding bilateral treaties and multilateral treaties about the parallel international litigation, on the prerequisites of international comity and self-constraint.