A Comparative Study Of Forum Non Conveniens In China And Japan

This paper makes a comparative study of forum non conveniens in China and Japan,hope to explore whether it is possible to make forum non conveniens in China better,and to find out the difficulty forum non conveniens in Japan is facing.In addition to the introduction and conclusion,the full text consists of three chapters.The first chapter is “Summary of forum non conveniens”,which intends to analyze the development of forum non conveniens or similar system to forum non conveniens in the United Kingdom,the United States and Germany.There are two perspectives to analyze forum non conveniens.The first is the legislative perspective,it is disassembled into two parts:“legislative value” and “procedures”.The second is the practical perspective,it is disassembled into three parts: “analysing of interests”,“analysing of conveniens” and “limitation of judges’ discretion”.The second chapter is “The legislative comparison of forum non conveniens in China and Japan”.By comparing the legislative examples of forum non conveniens in China and Japan,this chapter believes that forum non conveniens in China mainly focuses on the convenience of trial;while forum non conveniens in Japan considers fair trial,convenience of trial and restricting the choice of court.In the procedure,China does not support the court’s initiative to apply forum non conveniens,but Japan supports it;the two countries have the same attitude on the issue of the application of exceptions,but China’s regulations do not consider the issue of the exclusiveness of the jurisdiction agreement;in addition,the results of the application of this principle by China and Japan are all rejected.The third chapter is “The practice comparison of forum non conveniens in China and Japan”.By analyzing the judicial cases of the two countries,this chapter believes that the Chinese courts place too much emphasis on protecting the interests of China and its citizens and juridical person,while the practice of the Japanese courts focuses on the protection of the parties.At the same time,the reasoning of the Chinese court in defining the conveniens needs to be strengthened,while the Japanese court’s approach on this issue is more comprehensive.In terms of restricting judges’ discretion,the practice of Chinese courts makes the purpose of restricting the judegs’ discretion in defeat,while in Japan,due to the Japan Supreme Court’s precedents,the discretion of judges has been more fully restricted.This study believes that both China and Japan are the successors of the civil law system,but they have adopted forum non conveniens which originates in common law system.Forum non conveniens plays a compensatory role in the civil law system,and it also reflects the limited integration of the two legal systems in China and Japan.For China,what should be done is to return to fairness and justice in terms of legislative value,so that the interests of all parties can be fully considered,and the appropriateness of the court can be fully analyzed in each case.For Japan,how to pacify the rift when the common law system was integrated into the civil law system as soon as possible is the direction that it will strive for a long time to come.