我国商业活动例外条款的立场转向与司法适用研究
Study on the Position Shift and Judicial Application of China’s Commercial Activity Exception Clause

在国家豁免领域，国际社会存在着“绝对豁免”与“限制豁免”两种不同的实践。在多数国家转向限制豁免主义立场的潮流中，国内学者对我国坚持“绝对豁免”立场一直多有批评。而《外国国家豁免法》的出台标志着我国从“绝对豁免”立场转向“限制豁免”立场，从而为我国法院受理针对外国国家的诉讼提供了法律依据。在限制豁免主义的语境下，“商业活动”的界定和“司法管辖联系”的判断是法院受理主权豁免诉讼正当性的基础。针对“商业活动”的界定，可以将综合考虑行为的性质和目的的理解转变为考察行为中公权力因素的参与。针对司法管辖联系的判断，可以在“诉因联系”和“领土联系”的框架下，结合我国的司法传统，将美国法院提供的司法经验“本土化”。
In the area of State immunity, there are two different practices in the international community, namely, “absolute immunity” and “limited immunity”. In the trend of most countries turning to the position of restrictive immunity, domestic scholars have been critical of China’s adherence to the position of “absolute immunity”. The introduction of the Foreign State Immunity Act signaled a shift from the “absolute immunity” position to the “limited immunity” position, thus providing a legal basis for the courts of China to accept lawsuits against foreign States. In the context of limited immunity doctrine, the definition of “commercial activities” and “jurisdictional connection” is the basis for the court to accept the legitimacy of sovereign immunity lawsuit. The definition of “commercial activity” can be transformed from an understanding that takes into account the nature and purpose of the act to an examination of the involvement of public authority in the act. For the judgment of jurisdictional connection, under the framework of “cause of action connection” and “territorial connection”, combined with China's judicial tradition, the judicial experience provided by the U.S. courts can be “localized”.