跨境電商平臺選擇法院條款的效力審查：域外實踐及中國路徑

The Review of Effectiveness of Forum Selection Clauses Predetermined by Cross-Border E-Commerce Platforms: Overseas Practices and China's Approach

跨境電商平臺在用戶協議中預先擬定的選擇法院條款在內容設置和締結形式上表現出概括性約定糾紛適用範圍以及B2C管轄格式條款的特性。我國司法實踐對於該類條款適用範圍和有效性的判定模糊且不一致，反映出我國涉外協議管轄制度適用邊界模糊的問題。擴大當事人對涉外民商事案件的協議管轄範圍，既符合尊重當事人意思自治的國際私法發展趨勢，也與我國打造國際民商事糾紛訴訟優選地的政策目標相契合。以負面清單形式放寬當事人可協議約定管轄法院的糾紛範圍，能在提供確定性規則指引的基礎上，最大限度地尊重當事人意思自治。另外，各國對B2C管轄格式條款的有效性判定並無統一標準，但可以從中提煉出傾斜性保護消費者的價值判斷。將排除消費者住所地管轄解釋為不合理限制消費者主要權利的情形，有利於實現規範效果和消費者管轄利益保護目標的統一。

The predetermined forum selection clauses in the“Terms of Service”of the cross-border e-commerce platforms exhibit the characteristics of broad agreement on the scope of application and B2C jurisdiction standard clauses. Judicial verdicts in China regarding the applicability and validity of these clauses have been vague and inconsistent, highlighting issues of the ambiguity surrounding the scope of disputes subject to jurisdiction agreements. Expanding disputes subject to jurisdiction agreements is not only in line with the development trend of international private law that respects party autonomy, but also consistent with goal of making China a preferred place for international civil and commercial dispute resolution. To provide clear guidance while respecting party autonomy, it is beneficial to define the scope of disputes where parties can mutually designate adjudicated court through a negative list. Although global standards for determining the validity of B2C jurisdiction standard clauses remain diverse, a shared value prioritizing consumer protection can be discerned. By interpreting the exclusion of consumers domicile as an unjustifiable limitation on their core rights, we can align regulatory effectiveness with the protection of consumers' jurisdictional interests.