涉外繼承事件之國際管轄權──我國法、歐盟法與日本法之比較研究

International Jurisdiction in Succession Matters: A Comparative Study on Taiwanese, EU, and Japanese Law

伴隨全球化之進展，國際繼承法之重要性與日俱增，而有必要就準據法之選擇、國際管轄權之劃分，以及外國裁判之承認，妥適決定其基準，以促成事前之遺產規劃，或便利事後之遺產清理。其中，關於涉外繼承事件之國際管轄權，首先成為問題者，無非係其規範基礎何在？倘我國民事訴訟法、家事事件法之（土地）管轄規定屬之，其次成為問題者，則係其規範內容為何？此再可分為國際管轄原因及國際管轄裁量權二面向，均有待具體化、明確化；尤其在繼承準據法為外國法，而該外國法所設繼承制度為我國法所無，或者訴訟（程序）標的所繫遺產位於外國，而該遺產所在國將不承認我國法院之裁判等情形，我國法院能否藉由國際管轄裁量權迴避其適用之障礙，或降低跛行繼承關係之風險，頗滋疑義。有鑑於此，本文乃參考歐盟法、日本法及德國法，一面檢討我國學說、實務現況，一面本於遺產一體之原則，嘗試建構穩妥之解釋論。

With the ongoing advancement of globalization, the significance of international succession law has grown increasingly prominent. It has thus become imperative to establish clear and appropriate criteria concerning the choice of applicable law, the allocation of international jurisdiction, and the recognition of foreign judgments. Such clarification serves to facilitate both proactive estate planning and the efficient posthumous administration of estates. Among the key issues in cross-border succession lies the question of the normative foundation for international jurisdiction. If the territorial jurisdiction provisions under the Taiwanese Code of Civil Procedure and Family Act are deemed applicable, further inquiry must be directed toward the substantive content of such regulation. This inquiry may be bifurcated into two dimensions: the grounds for international jurisdiction and the jurisdictional discretion—both of which demand further specification and conceptual refinement. The complexity intensifies in scenarios where the applicable law governing succession is foreign, and the foreign legal system provides for inheritance institutions unknown to Taiwanese law, or where the estate in dispute is located abroad and the foreign state refuses to recognize judgments rendered by Taiwanese courts. In such cases, it remains a contentious issue whether Taiwanese courts may rely upon discretionary powers over international jurisdiction to avoid the application of foreign law or to mitigate the risk of contradictory succession relationships. In response to these concerns, this article draws upon comparative insights from European Union law, Japanese law, and German law. It examines prevailing academic and judicial approaches in Taiwan, and, invoking the unity of succession, endeavors to develop sound interpretation of law.