摘要
法院依据船舶扣押而获得实体管辖权已被视为公认的原则,本文通过对《海事诉讼特别程序法》(以下简称《海诉法》)相关条文进行理解和解释,主要分析扣押船舶法院是否应当享有审理实体纠纷的管辖权,以及该扣船法院享有管辖权的前提是否要满足“实际联系原则”。同时,在扣船法院对实体纠纷享有“实际联系原则”时,是否应当具有优先性。通过分析,判断上述原则是否具有合理性,并针对我国《海诉法》第19条提出修改的建议。
It is regarded as a generallyaccepted principle that the court obtains substantive jurisdiction based on thearrest of a vessel, and this article analyzes the relevant provisions of theSpecial Procedures Law on MaritimeLitigation (hereinafter referred to as the “Maritime Procedure Law”), mainlyanalyzing whether the court for the arrest of the vessel should havejurisdiction to hear substantive disputes, and whether the premise of thearrest court’s jurisdiction must meet the “principle of practical connection”.At the same time, whether the arrest court should have priority when it enjoysthe “principle of practical connection” in the substantive disputes. Throughanalysis, it is judged whether the aboveprinciples are reasonable, and suggestions are proposed for amendment toarticle 19 of “Maritime Procedure Law”.
出处
《争议解决》
2022年第2期238-243,共6页
Dispute Settlement
