Timeline for Can courts resolve disputes using a legal system outside their location?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
12 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 12, 2021 at 15:35 | vote | accept | justasking111 | ||
| Aug 9, 2021 at 21:40 | comment | added | ohwilleke | @DaleM Fair enough, I suppose, but with very narrow exceptions (cases in which U.S. federal courts have exclusive jurisdiction while the court in question lacks subject matter jurisdiction) this would be upheld in all U.S. jurisdictions and probably all Canadian ones and most other jurisdictions with Western style legal systems in the vast majority of circumstances. I've literally never seen one not honored, even in case law or news reports, despite being aware of the possibility. It is routine to have exclusively state court forum clauses in the marijuana industry in the U.S. | |
| Aug 9, 2021 at 21:36 | comment | added | Dale M♦ | BTW, this is a dangerous choice of forum law and a foreign court may not respect it. Whether a court has jurisdiction is a matter for the court to decide, not, as suggested one the parties can dictate. Using the term “exclusive” may make the whole clause void because a party may have a legal right to use another jurisdiction that can’t be contracted out of - the clause is therefore unlawful. Australian courts will knock out choice of forum clauses that suggest that another court has “exclusive” jurisdiction because they don’t. If local law is engaged, then local courts can rule. | |
| Aug 9, 2021 at 21:26 | comment | added | ohwilleke | @justasking111 Suppose Montreal based Replicate, a 3d printer maker, sells its goods with a service contract fulfilled by FixIt, based out of Toronto with local agents worldwide, that sells its printers all over North and South America, and FixIt waives possessory liens in the goods it repairs in exchange for other collateral supplied by Replicate. This allows a single contract, and Quebec law would provide a lot of default provisions that Ontario or U.S. law would not, allowing for a shorter contract that is easier for the parties to litigate and use day to day with one set of lawyers each. | |
| Aug 9, 2021 at 20:13 | comment | added | David Siegel | @justasking111 For example, when a civil case turns in part on the validity of a marriage (perhaps because that affects rules for intestate inheritance) the marriage is judged by the law of the place where it occurred.@ justasking111 | |
| Aug 9, 2021 at 19:50 | comment | added | ohwilleke | @justasking111 It is a bit cumbersome, but it doesn't come up very often and it usually comes up in high stakes cases where the burden of this is minimal compared to other concerns. | |
| Aug 9, 2021 at 19:49 | comment | added | ohwilleke | @justasking111 The judge typically considers the briefings of all parties on what the applicable law of the foreign place is and whether it applies. In the absence of argument to the contrary foreign law is presumed to be identical to forum state law. Also only substantive law and not procedural rules can be borrowed, although distinguishing between the two can be non-obvious. A foreign court's ruling is not binding precedent as to the meaning of a country's law. So, e.g., a French court ruling wouldn't bind a U.S. court regarding what a statute means, and also wouldn't impact French law. | |
| Aug 9, 2021 at 19:46 | history | edited | ohwilleke | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 1 character in body
|
| Aug 9, 2021 at 19:46 | comment | added | justasking111 | So the judge must learn and apply the laws of another jurisdiction? This seems cumbersome. Also wouldn't this affect case law and the general attitude of the court (i.e. some places are more conservative)? | |
| Aug 9, 2021 at 19:44 | history | edited | ohwilleke | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 1 character in body
|
| Aug 9, 2021 at 19:32 | history | edited | ohwilleke | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 206 characters in body
|
| Aug 9, 2021 at 19:25 | history | answered | ohwilleke | CC BY-SA 4.0 |