摘要
为解决国际平行诉讼问题,2023年修正的《中华人民共和国民事诉讼法》(下称《民事诉讼法》)涉外编第281条首次规定了先受理法院规则。先受理法院规则追求法律结果的确定性,适用该规则首先要明确“同一纠纷”和“受理时间”的认定标准。中国与其他大部分国家尚未形成欧盟成员国之间较为稳定的司法互信基础,故中国法院在处理国际平行诉讼时不能直接照搬欧盟内部严格的先受理法院规则,而是借鉴欧盟对第三国在先受理同一纠纷时保留自由裁量权的管辖权冲突解决方法。为了避免当事人利用先受理法院规则的时间标准恶意挑选法院,一方面,中国法院通过运用不方便法院原则的灵活性适当调节先受理法院规则的刚性;另一方面,最高人民法院可以通过出台关于先受理法院规则例外条款的司法解释以及明确法官的自由裁量权,增强先受理法院规则的适用弹性。法官依据先受理法院规则中止诉讼的自由裁量权需要相应的指引,“由人民法院审理明显更为方便”的内涵在司法解释中可以适当延展。《民事诉讼法》第282条不方便法院原则与第281条先受理法院规则无法互相取代,在处理国际平行诉讼时,不方便法院原则有助于缓解先受理法院规则的适用刚性。这两种制度共同规定了“更方便法院”以及“合理期限”,为了衔接二者的适用,在司法解释中,相同法律概念的解释需尽量统一。
Article 281 of the Civil Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China,amended in 2023,for the first time stipulates the first-in-time rule to resolve the issue of international parallel proceedings.The first-in-time rule aims to achieve legal certainty.To apply this rule,it is essential to clarify the criteria for determining the"same dispute"and the"time of acceptance".As China has not yet established a relatively stable judicial mutual trust with most other countries as EU member states have among themselves,Chinese courts cannot directly copy the strict first-in-time rule practiced in the EU when solving international parallel proceedings.Instead,they draw on the EU's approach to resolving jurisdictional conflicts by retaining discretion when a third country is first seized by the same dispute.To prevent parties from exploiting the temporal criteria of the first-in-time rule to engage in abusive forum shopping,on the one hand,Chinese courts are able to appropriately modulate the rigidity of the first-in-time rule by leveraging the flexibility of the doctrine of forum non conveniens;on the other hand,the Supreme People's Court can enhance the flexibility of the first-in-time rule by issuing judicial interpretation on the exception clauses of it and specify judges discretion.Guidance is necessary for judges when suspending proceedings under the first-in-time rule,and the interpretation of"obvious convenience for adjudication by the Chinese court"may be appropriately broadened.Articles 281(first-in-time rule)and 282(doctrine of forum non conveniens)of the Civil Procedure Law are mutually irreplaceable.In resolving international parallel proceedings,the doctrine of forum non conveniens helps to mitigate the rigidity of the first-in-time rule.Both provisions reference the"more convenient court"and"reasonable time limit".To harmonize their application,legal interpretations of these shared concepts should strive for consistency.
出处
《国际法研究》
2025年第4期70-85,共16页
Chinese Review of International Law
