全部 标题 作者
关键词 摘要

OALib Journal期刊
ISSN: 2333-9721
费用:99美元

查看量下载量

相关文章

更多...

侵权冲突法律适用的“回家去”趋势研究——以上海地区的涉外一般侵权案件为例
A Study on the Homeward Trend of Tort Conflict Law Application—A Case Study of Torts with Foreign Elements Cases in Shanghai

DOI: 10.12677/ds.2024.104243, PP. 394-399

Keywords: 法院地法,“回家去”趋势,涉外一般侵权法律适用
Lex Fori
, Homeward Trend, The Law on the Application of Laws to the Foreign-Related General Infringement Relationship

Full-Text   Cite this paper   Add to My Lib

Abstract:

为了研究我国自2011年《涉外民事关系法律适用法》通过至今在实践中的适用情况以及“回家去”趋势的变化,本文从“回家去”趋势的提出和成因引入,继而探讨了域外侵权法律适用中的“回家去”趋势。在发现上述情况的基础上,本文对侵权冲突法律适用中的“回家去”趋势的提出和背后的成因进行分析,并从上海地区案件的角度和国际化的角度两个方面论证得出“回家去”趋势应当被适当限制的结论。本论文最后从立法和司法两个角度对我国涉外一般侵权冲突规范提出建议,对我国侵权冲突法的完善具有理论和现实意义。
This paper aims to study thein Practice and the change of the homeward trend since 2011. This article introduces the proposal and causes of the trend of “going back home”, and then discusses the homeward trend in the application of tort law. This paper is introduced from the introduction of homeward trend and its causes, and then discusses homeward trend in the application of tort law. Based on the discovery of the above situations, this article analyzes the reasons behind homeward trend in the application of conflict of laws in tort, and concludes that the homeward trend should be appropriately limited from the perspectives of cases in Shanghai and internationalization. The thesis concludes that the homeward trend should be appropriately limited. Finally, this thesis puts forward suggestions on the norms of foreign-related general tort conflicts in China from both legislative and judicial perspectives, which is of theoretical and practical significance for the improvement of China’s tort conflict law.

References

[1]  De Boer, T.M. (1996) Facultative Choice of Law: The Procedural Status of Choice of Law Rules and Foreign Law. Hague Academy of International Law, 257, 391-392.
[2]  Scoles, E.F., Hay, P., Borchers, P.J. and Symenoides, S.C. (2000) Conflict of Laws.
[3]  梁仁辉. 主权原则与法院地法适用的冲突研究[J]. 理论观察, 2018(6): 112-116.
[4]  杜涛. 国际私法国际前沿年度报告(2019-2020) [J]. 国际法研究, 2021(4): 103-128.
[5]  李闰颜. 我国涉外一般侵权法律适用实证研究[D]: [硕士学位论文]. 厦门: 厦门大学, 2022.
[6]  文媛怡. 论我国侵权行为地认定规则的空白与补位——兼评《涉外民事关系法律适用法》第44条[J]. 大庆师范学院学报, 2016, 36(5): 5.
[7]  徐伟功. 美国法律适用中“回家去的趋势”及我国法律适用中的法院地法倾向[J]. 河南财经政法大学学报, 2013, 28(5): 67-75.
[8]  张稞汭. 论意思自治原则在涉外侵权领域的适用[D]: [硕士学位论文]. 重庆: 西南政法大学, 2020.
[9]  Reimann, M. (2000) Codifying Torts Conflicts: The 1999 German Legislation in Comparative Perspective. Louisiana Law Review, 60, 1297.
[10]  许凯. 双重可诉方法在侵权冲突法中的命运[J]. 法律方法, 2018, 23(1): 405-415.

Full-Text

Contact Us

service@oalib.com

QQ:3279437679

WhatsApp +8615387084133