摘要
法院选择协议兼具合同因素和程序因素,在性质上是合同性质还是程序性质,是自由属性主导还是强制属性主导,不同的法律定性决定了不同的制度展开。目前的发展趋势是,限制合意自由的程序性质论渐受冷落,弘扬合意自由的合同性质论则渐受肯定。我国法律规定的"实际联系"要求,对于保护私人利益的立法目的难以成立,同时在专属管辖的领域之外,对于保护公共利益的立法目的是无必要的。法院选择协议的法律适用问题,可以融入涉外合同法律适用的一般原理之中,首先应尊重当事人的意思自治。为促进国际民商事争议解决方式的多元发展,各国法律应像支持仲裁协议那样支持法院选择协议。
Choice of court agreements consist of both contractual and procedural elements,from which the issue of the nature of those agreements arises.The nature of procedure which limits the autonomy of contractual parties tends to be set aside,while the nature of contract which supports the party autonomy tends to be adopted.The requirement of 'real connections' as provided in our law will not carry out the purpose of protecting public interest,and private interest either.The issue of the applicable law of choice of court agreements should be resolved following the general principle of conflict of laws in foreign contracts.The free system of international trade needs to be secured by a free dispute-resolution system.
出处
《法学家》
CSSCI
北大核心
2011年第6期163-173,178,共11页
The Jurist
基金
教育部一般项目"国际私法与法哲学思潮的互动"(项目批准号:09YJC820054)的阶段性成果
南京大学985三期项目资助
关键词
法院选择协议
合同性质论
实际联系要求
法律适用
Choice of Court Agreements
Nature of Contract
Real Connections
Applicable Law
