A Study On The Maritime Jurisdiction

Under the tide of economic globalization, international economic trade has become one of the pillars for national economic development. Whereas most of the international trade is conducted via maritime transportation, and correspondingly, there is an increasing number of admiralty disputes about transportation and relations pertaining to ships, thus properly solving these disputes appears to safeguard national sovereignty,protect the interests of the parties and promote the international civil and commercial exchanges are of great significance. Maritime Litigation is one of the important procedures to resolve admiralty dispute, and the identification of maritime jurisdiction is the primary and key process for maritime procedure. So the correct execution of maritime jurisdiction is not only be considered as the precondition for a court to trial the case substantively, but also for the verdict of the case can be acknowledged and duly executed. In light of this, the intensive research about the maritime jurisdiction system has theoretical and practical significance.This paper makes a deep research about the maritime jurisdiction and its specific rules by using the comparative study approach, historical analysis, normal analysis and evidential analysis and so forth. Furthermore, the paper makes a comparative analysis of the system and status quo of maritime jurisdiction between countries under continental law system and Anglo-American law system and combine the actual situation and features of litigation of China in order to improve our maritime jurisdiction system.In particular, this paper can be divided into five parts:Part 1 discusses the definition and characteristics of maritime jurisdiction so as to clarify the specific subject to be studied. Then researched the concept of maritime jurisdiction in different legal systems and the characteristics of maritime jurisdiction to points out that the different understanding of the concept of jurisdiction can lead conflicts and contradiction among countries in the legislation and practice, and more worse the foreign-related and the broadness characteristics of maritime jurisdiction intensified the contradiction and conflict. Therefore, only by the method of comparative analysis of the differences between two main law systems of maritime jurisdiction, from the different countries’ complicated legal system to find their common spirit and kernel, and improve the situation, realize the jurisdiction of coordination and unity.Part 2 elaborates the theoretical basis of maritime jurisdiction, in which the basic contents of “power theory” and “theory of fairness” are analyzed and through making comparison, it points out the inevitability to evolve from power theory that takes powerful control and regional sovereignty as its main factors to theory of fairness that regards the substantial connection between disputes and forum state as its core content. And our country is still too much emphasis on the theory of power, ignored the fair and effective in jurisdiction, stay out of the development of the international jurisdiction. Therefore our country should timely adjust the theory which based on maritime jurisdiction, and more consider the fair theory, so as to adapt to the development of reality.Part 3 analyzes the exercise of the maritime jurisdiction, in this part, the paper research the principle and method of solving maritime jurisdiction conflict in two legal systems and the regulations in international conventions, then points out the flaw in jurisdiction conflict rules and legislation in our country. And provide reference of experience for our country’s legislation design about the foreign-related maritime jurisdiction conflict by taking the document research to make comprehensive comparison of the commonness and differences in terms of the way of exercise and basis for maritime jurisdiction in various countries under the two main legal systems.Part 4 discusses the conflicts and coordination mechanism for maritime jurisdiction. It analyzes the principles and methods adopted by the two legal systems respectively in resolving the conflicts of jurisdiction and the regulations in some international conventions, then points out the problems lie in the China’s existing rules set forth to coordinate the conflicts of jurisdiction. The advantages and disadvantages of the two systems are analyzed respectively by making comparison of the principle of forum non conveniens adopted by Anglo-American law system and principle of first-seized approach adopted by the continental law system to provide experience for our country about the legislative design of foreign-related maritime jurisdiction conflict.Part 5 provides some advices to improve the system of maritime jurisdiction in our country and analyzes the existing problems lie in the maritime jurisdiction of China and puts forward the suggestions for improvement. An the same time,to solve the conflict in maritime jurisdiction, this part puts forward the first seized approach, introduces declining jurisdiction system and establish a convenien system, and thus maybe can ensure the effective execution of maritime jurisdiction in our country.