当代美国一般管辖权发展的收缩表现及其反思——以戴姆勒案为例

The Contraction of General Jurisdiction in Contemporary America and Its Reflection——Taking Daimler A

  • 摘要: 与美国司法程序一样,美国对人管辖权应当是公平、统一以及具有可预测性,并要求平等对待原被告双方。美国联邦最高法院的判例戴姆勒案引起了美国学界的广泛讨论。该案缩小了法院长臂管辖权的范围,不仅没有厘清法院先前在固特异案中确立的“实质在家”标准的含义,而且在意图缩小一般管辖权的范围时也忽视了美国民事管辖传统原则“公平与实质正义”。从戴姆勒案判例分析来看,目前美国法院一般管辖权收缩倾向的出现则更多地侧重于经济和政策考量而非法理因素。

     

    Abstract: The jurisdiction of the United States should be fair, unified and predictable, and require equal treatment of the original defendant, as in the judicial process in the United States. The case of Daimler, the Supreme Court of the United States, has been widely discussed in American academic circles. The scope of the case reduced the court long arm jurisdiction, the court did not clarify previously the meaning of the standard which is the essence of "at home"established in the Goodyear case; meanwhile it ignored the American civil jurisdiction of the traditional principles of "equity and justice" in the scope of intent to narrow the general jurisdiction. The contraction tendency of general jurisdiction in American courts lays more emphasis on economic and policy considerations rather than the legal principal.

     

/

返回文章
返回