Research Of The EU Parallel Proceedings Systems Involving The Third States Court

All countries maintain and expand their own jurisdiction For their own interests.At the same time,the jurisdictional systems and practices of different countries which based on the different theoretical bases of common law countries and civil law countries,vary from one country to another.For the above reasons,it is easy to create parallel lawsuits between national courts and foreign courts.It is a common concern of EU member states and the third States that as a community organization that occupies an important position in the world,the EU handles the parallel proceedings between the member States court and the third States court.However,compared with the system of parallel proceedings between the member States court and the third States court,"when in the formulation of the "Brussels Convention",for the purpose of promoting the rapid circulation and rapid development of the European Union through the smooth implementation of the judgments made by the courts of member states in the recognition and enforcement of the courts among the member States,EU legislators are clearly more concerned with the parallel proceedings between the EU member States.Disregarding the matter of extraterritorial litigation in the EU area,the member States courts apply their national laws to deal with parallel proceedings between themselves and the third States court.In the event of inconsistencies in the national laws of the member States,not only has the chaos in the application of the EU parallel proceedings systems involving third States court been elicited,But also triggered the European Union to open up a unified road for the EU parallel proceedings systems involving third States court.This article will take the time as the orientation,mainly to sort out the development process of the European Union unified the EU parallel proceedings systems involving third States court,and analyzes the legislative considerations and the legislative policy of the EU parallel proceedings systems involving the third States court.First of all,for the legislative consideration of forum non convenience,the European Court of Justice,in its judgment in Owusu,expressed its position on the refusal of forum non convenience to deal with the EU parallel proceedings systems involving the third States court,which paved the way for considering forum non convenience as the legislative considerations in the future when the European Union unifies the rejection of the EU parallel proceedings systems involving the third States court.Second,for the legislative consideration of the unconditional first-seized court rule,the scholars should look forward to the European Court of Justice's reflexive approach to the application of the parallel proceedings system among EU member States courts.However,the European Court of Justice finally did not affirmatively reflexive approach,which paved the way for considering unconditional the first-seized rule as the legislative considerations in the future when the European Union unifies the rejection of the EU parallel proceedings systems involving the third States court.The above explorations and practices have drawn the attention of the European Union to the parallel proceedings involving the third States court.After the discussion of the applicable reports and the related reflections,the EU began to pay more attention to the issue of which paved the way for considering forum non convenience as the legislative considerations in the future when the European Union unifies the rejection of the EU parallel proceedings systems involving the third States court and made a great deal of exploration and preparation for it.After considering the legislative factors of expected recognition of the theory,the proper administration of justicee and reasonable litigation time,The Brussels system which deeply influenced by civil law countries,eventually formed a the EU parallel proceedings systems involving the third States court that adopted the relatively first-seized court rule.The issue of parallel foreign litigation in our country has always been the concern of academia.However,on the one hand,the specific provisions of the present parallel foreign litigation system in our country embody the principle of laissez-faire adopted by parallel litigation and pay more attention to it,and ensure the value orientation of our courts in case jurisdiction.On the other hand,On the other hand,the practice exposes the status quo in which judges judge parallel foreign-related litigation and apply domestic civil litigation law to adjust Foreign parallel proceedings.The double malpractice of the regulations and the practices has affected the settlement of conflicts of jurisdiction in our country.As a community organization that occupies an important position in the world,the EU parallel proceedings systems involving the third States court to our country and it is of great significance to our country to handle parallel litigation with EU member states and even other foreign courts.On the basis of borrowing the EU parallel proceedings systems involving the third States court,our country takes the relatively first-seized court rule as the legislative choice,the exclusive jurisdiction and the choice of the court agreement as the exception to the relatively first-seized court rule.