論國際平行訴訟的海牙公約方法與中國因應──以新《民事訴訟法》第281條為中心

Research on the Approach of International Civil Parallel Proceedings of Hague Convention and the Response of China——Concentrate on Article 281 of the New Civil Procedure Law

海牙國際私法會議舉辦二十年間所制定的一系列公約展現出平行訴訟方法的變化與談判各方的分歧，反映了各國開始更加重視本國管轄權自由裁量權的趨勢。在“直接管轄權”項中，由歐盟主導的具有確定性的先受理原則與美國主導的具有靈活性的不方便法院方法和更適合法院方法成為各方爭議的焦點。在涉外法治建設的背景下，2023年修訂的《民事訴訟法》首次在立法中兼採先受理法院原則與更適合法院方法，明確了國際平行訴訟的處理規則。這一方面是我國涉外法治發展的巨大進步，另一方面也存在不利於我國法院維護自身的涉外案件管轄權的一定風險。為此我國可考慮在未來對國際平行訴訟作進一步細分，在財產性訴訟中適當保留我國法院管轄權的自主性，在身份訴訟中更加積極採用先受理法院原則，以便與國際主流接軌的同時使我國法院在必要時獲取管轄權。

The evolution of schemes of international parallel proceedings in a series of conventions during the two decades by the Hague Conference on Private International Law (HCCH), and the controversy between the negotiating parties reflect the tendency that states pay more attention to the autonomy of their own jurisdictions. In the ''ongoing jurisdiction project'' of the HCCH, the EU-led ''first in-time-rule'' pattern and the US-led forum non conveniens pattern and ''more appropriate forum'' pattern are the focuses of current negotiations between countries. In the context of construction of foreign-related rule of law, it's the first time that the revised Civil Procedure Law 2023 comprehensively adopted ''first in-time-rule'' and ''more appropriate forum'', defining the rule of parallel proceedings. On the one hand, it is a great progress in the development of foreign-related rule of law in China, on the other hand, there is also certain risks that it is not conducive for Chinese courts to maintain their jurisdiction over foreign-related cases. Therefore, China could consider subdivide the cases of international parallel litigation, properly retain the autonomy of jurisdiction in property-based dispute, more actively adopt the ''first in time-rule'' in the foreign human identity relations disputes, so as to keep the possibilities for China's courts to acquire jurisdiction when necessary, at the same time, in line with the international mainstream.