Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
References for this paper are not available at this time. We will be adding them shortly, thank you for your patience.
TOPIC II.C.l LOUIS F. DEL DUCA & GEORGE A. ZAPHIRIOU Rule s for Declining to Exercise Jurisdiction in Civil an d Commercial Matters: Forum Non Conveniens, Lis Pendens This article concerns th e difficulties tha t arise whe n courts i n dif ferent territorial unit s assume or are about to assume jurisdictio n to deal with the same matte r between the same parties. Conflicts, or in any case costly duplication, between the two proceedings are avoided when one of th e multiple courts assumes jurisdictio n while th e other court stays or dismisses th e same case. Ideally, th e noncon- venient jurisdictions will dismiss th e case in favor of th e most conve nient forum. The factors which determine when a forum is not convenient are analyzed in Part I of this article. When no court is prepared to decline jurisdictio n by invoking th e doctrine of forum non conveniens, and two or more courts proceed to judgement indepen dently, we are faced by a lis alibi pendens situation (hereinafter re ferred to as lis pendens. Lis pendens will be dealt with in Par t II of this article. I. FORUM NO
American Journal of Comparative Law – Oxford University Press
Published: Dec 1, 1994
Read and print from thousands of top scholarly journals.
Already have an account? Log in
Bookmark this article. You can see your Bookmarks on your DeepDyve Library.
To save an article, log in first, or sign up for a DeepDyve account if you don’t already have one.
Copy and paste the desired citation format or use the link below to download a file formatted for EndNote
Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
All DeepDyve websites use cookies to improve your online experience. They were placed on your computer when you launched this website. You can change your cookie settings through your browser.