| 英文摘要 |
With the rapid development of commercialization of the internet, electronic commerce has changed people’s daily lives and the face of business. Electronic commerce enables internet users to shop globally, but it has also raised lots of cross-border disputes and resulted deeply impact to the legal practice of private international law. Traditional rules of private international law on jurisdiction are based on geographical connecting factors and they are not easy to be determined in the electronic world. The border-centric view of the law creates certain difficulties in an economy moving toward globalization, it is very difficult to apply traditional rules of international private law on jurisdiction in case a transaction is concluded or performed through the internet. Internet jurisdiction is an area of increasing concern to electronic commerce because of the growth in cross-border e-tailing. As the original country of internet and electronic commerce, US is keeping discussing about the judgement and determination of internet jurisdiction. The Supreme Court established “Minimum Contacts” standard in International Shoe Co. case for a court in one state to assert personal jurisdiction over a defendant from another state, and in Zippo case the District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania created a new test called “Sliding Scale” which examines the categories of a defendant’s website to evaluate the assertion of personal jurisdiction in cases involving the internet. The Zippo test has been cited by many courts but it has also undergone huge criticism, and some courts decided to use other tests such as “Effects Test” and “Targeting Test”. This paper will analysis the US approaches for determining jurisdiction in cases involving internet, clarify merits and demerits of the legal practice in the US and compare with current status of the legal practice in Taiwan. |
本站僅提供期刊文獻檢索。
