我国B2C电子合同消费者住所地管辖原则研究
|
摘要
网络时代下,电子商务迅速发展,B2C电子商务的发展最受关注。B2C电子商务中,消费者通过网络与商家签订合同,由于网络的无界性和开放性使得B2C电子合同拥有更多的涉外因素。目前,B2C电子合同纠纷管辖的机制可分为诉讼解决机制和非诉解决机制。虽然B2C合同纠纷一般采取在线纠纷解决机制,但是如果涉及诉讼,势必给国际民商事诉讼管辖带来更大的冲突。诉讼解决机制是解决纠纷的最有效的方式,而且通过诉讼得到的结果更具有权威性和可执行性。而且物理环境下的管辖原则在网络环境下受到冲击,在解决管辖权冲突时普通法系国家使用不方便法院原则和禁诉令,大陆法系国家使用先受诉管辖原则。但是这些原则在网络环境下变得不那么可行,而且我国实行“一国两制”,不论普通法系国家还是大陆法系国家的管辖原则在我国都不适用,所以迫切需要选择一个适合我国的管辖原则来切实维护我国的主权和利益。我国的B2C电子商务的发展是迅速的,可是不论《中华人民共和国合同法》还是《电子签名法》都没有涉及关于电子合同纠纷的诉讼管辖的规定,而且关于B2C电子合同纠纷的司法管辖权的研究不是很多,这势必会影响B2C电子商务的发展,所以应尽快在立法上确定对消费者有利的管辖原则即消费者住所地管辖原则。同时由于B2C电子合同中双方当事人地位是不平等的,虽然在网络环境下消费者的地位有所提高,但是消费者相对于商家来说仍处于弱势地位,所以网络环境下的管辖原则应注重保护消费者的合法权益。本文主要研究B2C合同纠纷的诉讼解决机制,通过研究欧盟《布鲁塞尔规则》和海牙《民商事管辖权及外国判决公约》草案中关于消费者原地管辖的描述和消费者住所地管辖原则在各国的适用,总结出消费者住所地管辖原则的优缺点,并结合我国仍处于信息输入国,得出我国在B2C电子合同中应适用更好地保护消费者的管辖原则即消费者住所地管辖原则,并对消费者住所地管辖原则如何在我国更好地适用提出自己的一点见解。通过这篇论文,希望对我国B2C电子合同纠纷的更好解决提高帮助。
In the e-commerce, B2C e-commerce develops fast.In the B2C e-commerce, consumers and business make the contract through the network. Network is unbounded and open; B2C contracts will involve other factors.Currently, B2C e-contract dispute proceedings on line. Dispute proceedings can be divided into non-complaint resolution mechanisms and settlement mechanism. If it involves litigation, the jurisdiction of the international civil and commercial litigation will be conflicted. Resolving the dispute settlement mechanism is the most effective way, and the results obtained through litigation more authoritative and enforceable. The traditional jurisdictional rules are attacked in a networked environment. To resolve conflicts of jurisdiction in common law countries use the principle of forum non convenient and anti-suit injunctions, civil law countries use the first Appellate jurisdiction, but these principles in the network environment changes a little less viable, and our implementation of“one country two systems”, whether common law or civil law countries do not apply the principle of national jurisdiction, there is an urgent need to select a suitable rules of the jurisdiction of the safeguard our sovereignty and interests. China’s B2C e-commerce development is very fast, but whether the“Contract Law”or“Electronic Signature Act”do not involve a dispute concerning the jurisdiction of the electronic contract provisions, and B2C electronic contracts on the jurisdiction of disputes not many, this will definitely affect the development of B2C e-commerce, so as soon as possible to determine the legislative jurisdiction of the principle of benefit to consumers that the jurisdiction of the home jurisdiction. In B2C contracts the two sides is unequal, although the development of the network makes the position of consumers has increased, but the business is still opposed to consumers in a weak position, so in the research network under the jurisdiction of the rules of the environment should focus on protecting the legitimate rights and interests of consumers. This paper studies B2C contract litigation settlement mechanism, by studying the EU“Brussels rules”and“On the Civil Jurisdiction and Judgments Convention”consumers place on the draft description of the jurisdiction and the jurisdiction of the home jurisdiction in different countries, summarized the advantages and disadvantages of the home jurisdiction, combined with China in the Internet age is still a relatively weak information importing country. In the B2C electronic contracts benefit consumers to be followed in principle that the jurisdiction of the consumer home jurisdiction, the jurisdiction of the home of the consumer and how to make our country better. Through this paper, in hopes of China’s B2C e-settlement of contractual disputes better.
In the e-commerce, B2C e-commerce develops fast.In the B2C e-commerce, consumers and business make the contract through the network. Network is unbounded and open; B2C contracts will involve other factors.Currently, B2C e-contract dispute proceedings on line. Dispute proceedings can be divided into non-complaint resolution mechanisms and settlement mechanism. If it involves litigation, the jurisdiction of the international civil and commercial litigation will be conflicted. Resolving the dispute settlement mechanism is the most effective way, and the results obtained through litigation more authoritative and enforceable. The traditional jurisdictional rules are attacked in a networked environment. To resolve conflicts of jurisdiction in common law countries use the principle of forum non convenient and anti-suit injunctions, civil law countries use the first Appellate jurisdiction, but these principles in the network environment changes a little less viable, and our implementation of“one country two systems”, whether common law or civil law countries do not apply the principle of national jurisdiction, there is an urgent need to select a suitable rules of the jurisdiction of the safeguard our sovereignty and interests. China’s B2C e-commerce development is very fast, but whether the“Contract Law”or“Electronic Signature Act”do not involve a dispute concerning the jurisdiction of the electronic contract provisions, and B2C electronic contracts on the jurisdiction of disputes not many, this will definitely affect the development of B2C e-commerce, so as soon as possible to determine the legislative jurisdiction of the principle of benefit to consumers that the jurisdiction of the home jurisdiction. In B2C contracts the two sides is unequal, although the development of the network makes the position of consumers has increased, but the business is still opposed to consumers in a weak position, so in the research network under the jurisdiction of the rules of the environment should focus on protecting the legitimate rights and interests of consumers. This paper studies B2C contract litigation settlement mechanism, by studying the EU“Brussels rules”and“On the Civil Jurisdiction and Judgments Convention”consumers place on the draft description of the jurisdiction and the jurisdiction of the home jurisdiction in different countries, summarized the advantages and disadvantages of the home jurisdiction, combined with China in the Internet age is still a relatively weak information importing country. In the B2C electronic contracts benefit consumers to be followed in principle that the jurisdiction of the consumer home jurisdiction, the jurisdiction of the home of the consumer and how to make our country better. Through this paper, in hopes of China’s B2C e-settlement of contractual disputes better.
引文
[1]《中华人民共和国合同法》[S].第61条.
[2]《中华人民共和国合同法》[S].第62条.
[1]武敏.在线仲裁与B2C模式下电子商务纠纷的解决[J].江苏警官学院学报,2003,(2).12.
[1]李广辉.<民商事管辖权及外国判决公约>研究[M].北京:中国法制出版社.2008.51.
[2]刘仁山,夏晓红.互联网消费者合同的管辖权的发展与完善[J].中国国际私法与比较年刊,2004.23.
[3]夏晓红.互联网消费者合同管辖权问题研究[J].中南财经政法大学学报,2004.24.
[1]高慧云,秦丽平.电子商务法教程[M].北京:华文出版社,2005.143.
[1] [美]罗伯特·L.霍格、克里斯托夫·P.博姆,何乃刚译,黄列校.因特网与其管辖权—国际原则已经出现但对抗也隐约可见[J].环球法律评论,2001,(1).30.
[2]宋建立.国际民商事诉讼管辖权冲突的协调与解决[M].北京:法律出版社,2009.7.
[3]李广辉.<民商事管辖权及外国判决公约>研究[M].北京:中国法制出版社.2008.49.
[4]李广辉.<民商事管辖权及外国判决公约>研究[M].北京:中国法制出版社.2008.106.
[1]何其生.电子商务的国际私法问题[M].北京:法律出版社.2004.92.
[2]朱颖.电子商务环境下消费者电子合同的国际管辖权问题[J].重庆大学法学报.2007,(2).2.
[3]宋建立.国际民商事诉讼管辖权冲突的协调与解决[M].北京:法律出版社,2009.81-82.
[1]郭学文.电子商务交易法律问题研究[M].青岛:中国海洋大学出版社,2008.
[2]高富平.电子合同与电子签名法研究报告[M].北京:北京大学出版社,2005.
[3]武敏.在线仲裁与B2C模式下电子商务纠纷的解决[J].江苏警官学院学报,2003,(2).
[4]刘仁山,夏晓红.互联网消费者合同的管辖权的发展与完善[J].中国国际私法与比较年刊,2004,(1).
[5]何其生.电子商务中的国际私法[M].北京:法律出版社,2004.
[6]孙娟.我国电子商务消费者合同管辖权的发展与完善[J].湖北经济学院学报,2009,(1).
[7][美]罗伯特·L.霍格、克里斯托夫·P.博姆,何乃刚译,黄列校.因特网与其管辖权—国际原则已经出现但对抗也隐约可见[J].环球法律评论,2001,(1).
[8]高富平.电子商务法学[M].北京:北京大学出版社,2008.
[9]Catherine.Internet and Electronic Commerce[J].Canadian Business Law Journal,1999(3).
[10]Katharina Boele-Woelki.Internet,Which Court Decides, Which Law Applies [J].Kluwer Law International ,1998,(17).
[11]朱颖.电子商务环境下消费者电子合同的国际管辖权问题[J].重庆大学法学报,2007,(2).
[12]魏宏.B2C电子商务现状及问题[J].中国电子商务杂志,2003,(2).
[13]于颖.电子商务案件的国际管辖权问题研究[D].辽宁:大连海事大学法学院,2003.
[14]于若辰.跨国网络消费合同的国际私法问题研究[D].上海:复旦大学法学院,2010.
[15]郝斌.电子商务争议诉讼解决的法律问题研究[D].福建:华侨大学法学院,2007.
[16]白丽丽.电子商务纠纷民事诉讼管辖研究[D].重庆:西南政法大学法学院,2009.
[17]卫荣辉.国际合同法律适用中的弱者利益保护研究[D] .广西:广西师范大学法学院,2010.
[18]戚小峰.电子商务纠纷救济机制探析[D]重庆:西南政法大学法学院,2008.
[19]宋建立.国际民商事诉讼管辖权冲突的协调与解决[M].北京:法律出版社,2009.
[20]黄进,何其生.电子商务及冲突法的变革[J].中国法学,2003,(1).
[21]高慧云,秦丽平.电子商务法教程[M].北京:华文出版社,2005.
[22] Kristen Clayton.The Draft Hague Convention on Jurisdiction and Enforcement of Judgments and the Internet- A New Jurisdictional Framework[J].Journal of The Missouri Bar,2007,(3).
[23]Chris Gosnell.Jurisdiction on the Net: Defining Place in Cyberspace [J].29Canadian Business Law Journal 344-63.1998,(6).
[24]宗文,林栋,吕梁.如何确定电子商务合同的管辖权[J].电子商务世界,2005,(5).
[25]肖永平,何其生.<海牙管辖权公约>草案所涉电子商务问题之建议[J].武汉大学学报,2001,(2).
[26] Mark Sableman.Business on the Internet, Part I Jurisdiction[J]. Journal of The Missouri Bar, 1997,(3).
[27]Duane G. Crocker, Out-of-State Jurisdiction and the Internet:Where We Now with the Court System? [J].Victoria Business Magazine,2005,(3).
[28]李静.互联网环境下的国际民事管辖权[J].中国法学,2006,(1).
[29]秦晋.国际私法保护弱者原则之研究[D].吉林:吉林大学法学院,2008 .
[30]夏晓红.互联网消费者合同管辖权问题研究[J].中南财经政法大学学报,2004,(3).
[31]N.Jansen Calamities.International Litigation,38 Int’1 Law[M].Oxford:Clarendon Press,2004.
[32]徐卉.涉外民商事诉讼管辖权冲突研究[M].北京:中国政法大学出版社,2001.
[33]马綪.跨国电子商务B2C模式下的消费者权益保护法律问题研究[D].贵州:贵州大学法学院,2007.
[34]李广辉.<民商事管辖权及外国判决公约>研究[M].北京:中国法制出版社.2008.
[35]齐恩平.电子合同争议的司法管辖权研究[J].法学杂志,2004,(5).
[36]于飞.Internet环境下国际私法的价值取向[J].兰州大学学报,2002,(6).
[37]刘仁山,夏晓红.互联网消费者合同的管辖权问题—消费者原地管辖规则的新发展及其前景[J].中国国际私法与比较法年刊,2004,(1).
[38]郭玉军,向在胜.欧盟电子消费合同管辖权问题研究[J].武汉大学学报,2002,(3).
[39]郭玉军,向在胜.美国网络案件管辖权研究[J].国际法与比较法论丛,2002,(1).
[40]杜新丽.国际私法实务中的法律问题[M].北京:中信出版社.2005.
[41]中华人民共和国合同法[S].1999.
[42]黄邦道,张友强.电子商务法律问题研究[J].特区经济,2008,(12).
[43] HD Tebbens.Declining Jurisdiction in Private International Law[M].Oxford:Clarendon Press,1995.
[44]李赛男.论跨国民商事管辖权的价值新取向[D].湖南:中南大学法学院.2009.
[45]覃宇翔,袁林.网络合同案件的管辖制度[J].信息网络安全,2004,(4).
[46]中华人民共和国民事诉讼法[S].2007.
[47]唐雯.浅议电子合同纠纷的管辖权[J].河南司法警官职业学院学报,2008(4).
[48]袁菲.电子合同的若干法律问题浅析[J].邢台学院学报,2009,(1).
[49]欧阳明子,粟果.从网上购物看电子合同中消费者权益的保护—来自社会调查报告的启示[J].知识经济,2009,(8).
[50]黄进,邹国勇.欧盟民商事管辖权规则的嬗变—从《布鲁塞尔公约》到《布鲁塞尔条例》[J].东岳论丛,2006,(05) .
[51]何其生,杨泽伟,张辉,许威.中国国际法学三十年(1978—2008)[A].姜明安.中国法学三十年(1978—2008)[C] .北京:中国人民大学出版社,2008.
[52]谭治宇.电子合同纠纷管辖的确定[J].邵阳学院学报,2007,(3).
[53]徐伟功,柳絮.电子合同管辖权问题探讨—基于欧美和海牙国际私法会议的立法和实践[J].东方论坛,2005,(6).
[54]张超.从网上购物看电子合同的相关法律问题[J].重庆科技学院学报,2010,(13).
[2]《中华人民共和国合同法》[S].第62条.
[1]武敏.在线仲裁与B2C模式下电子商务纠纷的解决[J].江苏警官学院学报,2003,(2).12.
[1]李广辉.<民商事管辖权及外国判决公约>研究[M].北京:中国法制出版社.2008.51.
[2]刘仁山,夏晓红.互联网消费者合同的管辖权的发展与完善[J].中国国际私法与比较年刊,2004.23.
[3]夏晓红.互联网消费者合同管辖权问题研究[J].中南财经政法大学学报,2004.24.
[1]高慧云,秦丽平.电子商务法教程[M].北京:华文出版社,2005.143.
[1] [美]罗伯特·L.霍格、克里斯托夫·P.博姆,何乃刚译,黄列校.因特网与其管辖权—国际原则已经出现但对抗也隐约可见[J].环球法律评论,2001,(1).30.
[2]宋建立.国际民商事诉讼管辖权冲突的协调与解决[M].北京:法律出版社,2009.7.
[3]李广辉.<民商事管辖权及外国判决公约>研究[M].北京:中国法制出版社.2008.49.
[4]李广辉.<民商事管辖权及外国判决公约>研究[M].北京:中国法制出版社.2008.106.
[1]何其生.电子商务的国际私法问题[M].北京:法律出版社.2004.92.
[2]朱颖.电子商务环境下消费者电子合同的国际管辖权问题[J].重庆大学法学报.2007,(2).2.
[3]宋建立.国际民商事诉讼管辖权冲突的协调与解决[M].北京:法律出版社,2009.81-82.
[1]郭学文.电子商务交易法律问题研究[M].青岛:中国海洋大学出版社,2008.
[2]高富平.电子合同与电子签名法研究报告[M].北京:北京大学出版社,2005.
[3]武敏.在线仲裁与B2C模式下电子商务纠纷的解决[J].江苏警官学院学报,2003,(2).
[4]刘仁山,夏晓红.互联网消费者合同的管辖权的发展与完善[J].中国国际私法与比较年刊,2004,(1).
[5]何其生.电子商务中的国际私法[M].北京:法律出版社,2004.
[6]孙娟.我国电子商务消费者合同管辖权的发展与完善[J].湖北经济学院学报,2009,(1).
[7][美]罗伯特·L.霍格、克里斯托夫·P.博姆,何乃刚译,黄列校.因特网与其管辖权—国际原则已经出现但对抗也隐约可见[J].环球法律评论,2001,(1).
[8]高富平.电子商务法学[M].北京:北京大学出版社,2008.
[9]Catherine.Internet and Electronic Commerce[J].Canadian Business Law Journal,1999(3).
[10]Katharina Boele-Woelki.Internet,Which Court Decides, Which Law Applies [J].Kluwer Law International ,1998,(17).
[11]朱颖.电子商务环境下消费者电子合同的国际管辖权问题[J].重庆大学法学报,2007,(2).
[12]魏宏.B2C电子商务现状及问题[J].中国电子商务杂志,2003,(2).
[13]于颖.电子商务案件的国际管辖权问题研究[D].辽宁:大连海事大学法学院,2003.
[14]于若辰.跨国网络消费合同的国际私法问题研究[D].上海:复旦大学法学院,2010.
[15]郝斌.电子商务争议诉讼解决的法律问题研究[D].福建:华侨大学法学院,2007.
[16]白丽丽.电子商务纠纷民事诉讼管辖研究[D].重庆:西南政法大学法学院,2009.
[17]卫荣辉.国际合同法律适用中的弱者利益保护研究[D] .广西:广西师范大学法学院,2010.
[18]戚小峰.电子商务纠纷救济机制探析[D]重庆:西南政法大学法学院,2008.
[19]宋建立.国际民商事诉讼管辖权冲突的协调与解决[M].北京:法律出版社,2009.
[20]黄进,何其生.电子商务及冲突法的变革[J].中国法学,2003,(1).
[21]高慧云,秦丽平.电子商务法教程[M].北京:华文出版社,2005.
[22] Kristen Clayton.The Draft Hague Convention on Jurisdiction and Enforcement of Judgments and the Internet- A New Jurisdictional Framework[J].Journal of The Missouri Bar,2007,(3).
[23]Chris Gosnell.Jurisdiction on the Net: Defining Place in Cyberspace [J].29Canadian Business Law Journal 344-63.1998,(6).
[24]宗文,林栋,吕梁.如何确定电子商务合同的管辖权[J].电子商务世界,2005,(5).
[25]肖永平,何其生.<海牙管辖权公约>草案所涉电子商务问题之建议[J].武汉大学学报,2001,(2).
[26] Mark Sableman.Business on the Internet, Part I Jurisdiction[J]. Journal of The Missouri Bar, 1997,(3).
[27]Duane G. Crocker, Out-of-State Jurisdiction and the Internet:Where We Now with the Court System? [J].Victoria Business Magazine,2005,(3).
[28]李静.互联网环境下的国际民事管辖权[J].中国法学,2006,(1).
[29]秦晋.国际私法保护弱者原则之研究[D].吉林:吉林大学法学院,2008 .
[30]夏晓红.互联网消费者合同管辖权问题研究[J].中南财经政法大学学报,2004,(3).
[31]N.Jansen Calamities.International Litigation,38 Int’1 Law[M].Oxford:Clarendon Press,2004.
[32]徐卉.涉外民商事诉讼管辖权冲突研究[M].北京:中国政法大学出版社,2001.
[33]马綪.跨国电子商务B2C模式下的消费者权益保护法律问题研究[D].贵州:贵州大学法学院,2007.
[34]李广辉.<民商事管辖权及外国判决公约>研究[M].北京:中国法制出版社.2008.
[35]齐恩平.电子合同争议的司法管辖权研究[J].法学杂志,2004,(5).
[36]于飞.Internet环境下国际私法的价值取向[J].兰州大学学报,2002,(6).
[37]刘仁山,夏晓红.互联网消费者合同的管辖权问题—消费者原地管辖规则的新发展及其前景[J].中国国际私法与比较法年刊,2004,(1).
[38]郭玉军,向在胜.欧盟电子消费合同管辖权问题研究[J].武汉大学学报,2002,(3).
[39]郭玉军,向在胜.美国网络案件管辖权研究[J].国际法与比较法论丛,2002,(1).
[40]杜新丽.国际私法实务中的法律问题[M].北京:中信出版社.2005.
[41]中华人民共和国合同法[S].1999.
[42]黄邦道,张友强.电子商务法律问题研究[J].特区经济,2008,(12).
[43] HD Tebbens.Declining Jurisdiction in Private International Law[M].Oxford:Clarendon Press,1995.
[44]李赛男.论跨国民商事管辖权的价值新取向[D].湖南:中南大学法学院.2009.
[45]覃宇翔,袁林.网络合同案件的管辖制度[J].信息网络安全,2004,(4).
[46]中华人民共和国民事诉讼法[S].2007.
[47]唐雯.浅议电子合同纠纷的管辖权[J].河南司法警官职业学院学报,2008(4).
[48]袁菲.电子合同的若干法律问题浅析[J].邢台学院学报,2009,(1).
[49]欧阳明子,粟果.从网上购物看电子合同中消费者权益的保护—来自社会调查报告的启示[J].知识经济,2009,(8).
[50]黄进,邹国勇.欧盟民商事管辖权规则的嬗变—从《布鲁塞尔公约》到《布鲁塞尔条例》[J].东岳论丛,2006,(05) .
[51]何其生,杨泽伟,张辉,许威.中国国际法学三十年(1978—2008)[A].姜明安.中国法学三十年(1978—2008)[C] .北京:中国人民大学出版社,2008.
[52]谭治宇.电子合同纠纷管辖的确定[J].邵阳学院学报,2007,(3).
[53]徐伟功,柳絮.电子合同管辖权问题探讨—基于欧美和海牙国际私法会议的立法和实践[J].东方论坛,2005,(6).
[54]张超.从网上购物看电子合同的相关法律问题[J].重庆科技学院学报,2010,(13).
© 2004-2018 中国地质图书馆版权所有 京ICP备05064691号 京公网安备11010802017129号 地址：北京市海淀区学院路29号 邮编：100083 电话：办公室：(+86 10)66554848；文献借阅、咨询服务、科技查新：66554700 |