Choose an application

• Reference Manager
• EndNote
• RefWorks (Direct export to RefWorks)

"The forum (non) conveniens doctrine provides the basis for the discretionary exercise of jurisdiction by English courts in private international law disputes. London's pre-eminence as a centre for international commercial litigation has led to the frequent deployment of this doctrine in proceedings where parties disagree over where the case should be heard. The doctrine's significance is not limited to England but extends to many Commonwealth jurisdictions which have embraced it. This is the first book-length study devoted entirely to examining the forum (non) conveniens doctrine's past, present, and future from the perspective of the law in England. By offering a meticulous and critical analysis of relevant historical and contemporary sources in England and elsewhere, it seeks to fill gaps in relevant knowledge of the English forum (non) conveniens doctrine, and to challenge certain views concerning its operation that have come to be regarded as representing the orthodoxy. In this respect, the book attempts to refine our understanding of the doctrine's historical development, evaluate its application in the years following its formal recognition in England, and examine the case for revising it, given the changing nature of international commercial litigation in recent decades. The book's ultimate objective is to act as an authoritative and a comprehensive reference point for those with an interest in the forum (non) conveniens doctrine, more specifically, and cross-border private litigation, more generally."--Bloomsbury Publishing.

Forum non conveniens

Choose an application

• Reference Manager
• EndNote
• RefWorks (Direct export to RefWorks)

"One of the issues left untouched by the Brussels Convention of 27 September 1968 (and by the Brussels-1 Regulation replacing it) concerns the leeway left to domestic courts when applying European rules on international jurisdiction in civil and commercial matters. For instance, is the court under a duty of strict compliance with the jurisdiction rule as it is drafted? Would such a duty go so far as to require the court to abide by the jurisdiction rule, even though it is being used by one of the litigants to achieve an unfair result, for example to delay adjudication on the merits? Under what conditions may the Court decline jurisdiction on account of any unsuitable forum shopping, thus ruling out the European provision on jurisdiction? Recent litigation in the ECJ has yielded rather, even excessively, restrictive answers, ruling out any discretion by domestic courts to remedy any inconvenience arising from the strict application of the European provisions, if such discretion were provided for by the lex fori (the Gasser case, the Turner case, and the Owusu case). This series of rulings from the ECJ raises several questions. Most observers have questioned the appropriateness of prescribing a blind application of European rules on jurisdiction by domestic courts, relying on the legal traditions of EC Member States usually providing for corrective mechanisms - such as 'forum non conveniens' in English Law and 'exception de fraude' in French Law - in cases when a party abusively triggers the jurisdiction of a court in order to obtain an unjust advantage, thus practising unacceptable forum shopping. The time has now come for an analysis, under both Community and comparative law, of the ramifications of the recent Gasser/Turner/Owusu cases. Readers will find in this book a collection of studies by some of the leading English and French experts today, analysing the ins and outs of jurisdiction and forum shopping in Europe."--Bloomsbury Publishing.

Civil procedure --- Forum non conveniens. --- Forum shopping --- Jurisdiction

Choose an application

• Reference Manager
• EndNote
• RefWorks (Direct export to RefWorks)

Le débat est animé concernant les entreprises multinationales qui bafouent les droits de l'homme lors de leurs activités à l'étranger et la question de l'accès de leurs victimes aux tribunaux est récurrente. Bien qu'elles soient centrales lorsqu'un procès est envisagé, les règles de procédure, techniques par nature, sont souvent reléguées au second plan. Il en va ainsi du forum non conveniens, une doctrine selon laquelle un juge canadien compétent peut renvoyer un litige devant le tribunal du pays hôte. Or, cette doctrine est problématique relativement à la responsabilité des entreprises multinationales : si la justice ne peut être rendue, la responsabilité sociétale des entreprises n'est-elle pas qu'un miroir aux alouettes au Canada ? Cet ouvrage présente la doctrine du forum non conveniens de manière historique, synthétique et critique et revient sur l'actualité entourant le phénomène de judiciarisation de la responsabilité sociale des grandes entreprises, tant au Canada qu'aux États-Unis et en Europe. En exposant les plus récentes décisions judiciaires canadiennes dans ce domaine, cet ouvrage démontre que les juges ont tendance à accueillir plus favorablement les victimes étrangères dès lors que la responsabilité extracontractuelle d'une entreprise multinationale pour des violations des droits de l'homme est invoquée.

Social responsibility of business. --- Droits de l'homme, entreprises multinationales, forum non conveniens. --- RSE, règles de procédure.

Choose an application

• Reference Manager
• EndNote
• RefWorks (Direct export to RefWorks)

Law of civil procedure --- International private law --- Conflict of laws --- Juridiction (Droit international privé) --- Jurisdiction --- Forum non conveniens. --- Jurisdiction (International law) --- Jurisdiction. --- 341.9 --- Internationaal privaatrecht --(algemeen) --- Jurisdiction (International law). --- 341.9 Internationaal privaatrecht --(algemeen) --- Juridiction (Droit international privé) --- Forum non conveniens --- Domestic jurisdiction --- International jurisdiction --- Jurisdiction, Domestic --- Jurisdiction, International --- Arbitration (International law) --- International courts --- Inconvenient forum --- Transfer of cause --- Conflict of laws - Jurisdiction. --- DROIT INTERNATIONAL PRIVE --- DROIT COMPARE --- DECLINATOIRE DE COMPETENCE --- CONFLIT DE JURIDICTIONS --- ANGLETERRE --- ETATS-UNIS

Choose an application

• Reference Manager
• EndNote
• RefWorks (Direct export to RefWorks)

Forum shopping --- Jurisdiction --- Civil procedure --- Forum non conveniens --- Forum non conveniens. --- Economic law --- European law --- International private law --- Juridiction --- Procédure civile --- Inconvenient forum --- Conflict of laws --- Transfer of cause --- Law and legislation --- Forum shopping - European Union countries --- Jurisdiction - European Union countries --- Civil procedure - European Union countries --- Union européenne --- Coopération judiciaire en matière civile et commerciale --- Compétence judiciaire --- Reconnaissance et exécution des décisions --- Droit judiciaire