国际民事诉讼法课件

1、国际民事诉讼法Law of International Civil Procedure国际民事诉讼法概述国际民事案件的管辖权国际民事诉讼中的送达、取证、期间和保全国际民事诉讼中法院判决的承认与执行国际司法协助第二十五章 国际民事诉讼法概述国际民事诉讼程序和国际民事诉讼法 国际民事诉讼法的基本原则 国际民事诉讼当事人的民事诉讼地位 国际民事诉讼程序（international civil procedure）国际民事诉讼程序，也称涉外民事诉讼程序，是指含有国际因素，或者从某个主权国家的角度来说，含有涉外因素的民事诉讼。也就是说，在有关的民事诉讼中涉及到两个或两个以上国家的人和事，或同两个或两个以

2、上的国家存在不同程度的联系。 国际民事诉讼法（law of international civil procedure）国际民事诉讼法是指规定国际民事诉讼程序各种法律规范的总和。其主要内容包括如下三个方面：（1）规定国际民事诉讼程序中外国当事人，包括外国自然人、外国法人、外国国家和国际组织的民事诉讼地位的法律规范；（2）规定国际民商事案件中法院管辖权的法律规范；（3）规定国际民事诉讼程序有关诉讼和非诉讼文书的域外送达，有关域外取证，有关国际民事诉讼期间，以及有关法院判决在相关国家的相互承认与执行的法律规范。国际民事诉讼法的法律渊源主要有国内立法和国际立法两个方面。此外，很多国家也将内国法院的司

3、法判例以及在国际社会通行的国际惯例视为国际民事诉讼法的重要渊源。第二节 国际民事诉讼法的基本原则（basic principles） 国家主权原则（sovereignty） 国民待遇原则（national treatment） 平等互惠原则（equality and mutual benefit） 尊重国际条约和尊重国际惯例原则（respect for international treaties and international customs） 国家主权原则 国家主权原则在国际民事诉讼法领域表现为一个国家有权通过立法的形式对该国境内的所有诉讼活动和行为进行规范；外国人（包括外国法人和自然

4、人）在该国境内进行诉讼活动都必须遵守当地国家的诉讼法规范；有关国家还可以根据自己的国家利益、社会利益规定对某些案件行使专属管辖权，从而排除其他国家审理有关案件的可能性。 在司法方面，一个国家的法院有权依据其本国的诉讼法规范受理并审理有关的案件；除国际条约或有关国家的法律有相反的规定以外，外国人有义务接受所在国法院的这种司法管辖权。 国家主权原则还表现为一个国家及其财产在国外享有司法豁免权。即非经有关国家明确表示放弃该项权利，其他国家的法院无权受理以该有关国家作为被告的诉讼；有关国家的财产非经其所有国明确同意不得被其他国家的法院作为诉讼标的而施以扣押、执行等诉讼行为。 国民待遇原则国民待遇原则是

5、一个国家对外国人在某些方面给予与本国国民同等的待遇。在国际民事诉讼法领域表现为一个国家把给予其本国国民的民事诉讼权利，也给予在本国境内的外国人；该国法院并不仅仅以有关当事人具有外国国籍或无国籍或在外国没有住所为理由而要求其提供诉讼费用担保或对其采取“诉讼保全”等限制其诉讼权利的措施。国民待遇原则包含两个方面的内容：其一是外国人在内国境内享受与内国国民同等的诉讼权利，承担同等的诉讼义务，其诉讼权利不因其为外国人而受限制；其二是外国人在内国境内享受的诉讼权利不能超出内国国民所能享受的权利范围，任何基于所谓“文明世界”的“国际标准”或“最低标准”而要求超出当地国民所享有的权利范围的主张都是不合理的，

6、都是违反国际法的。我国现行的民事诉讼法也在第5条第1款明确规定：“外国人、无国籍人、外国企业和组织在人民法院起诉、应诉，同中华人民共和国公民、法人和其他组织有同等的诉讼权利义务。”平等互惠原则平等互惠原则表现在国际民事诉讼法领域，就是各个国家在平等的基础上相互赋予对方国家和国民以民事诉讼权利；在同等的条件下相互适用对方的诉讼立法；相互给予司法上的协助，包括相互承认和执行对方法院的判决和仲裁裁决；在规范有关程序或处理国际民商事法律争议时应该给予互惠待遇。世界上多数国家的诉讼立法都规定，如果有关国家之间不存在互惠关系，如果有关外国赋予内国国民以不平等的民事诉讼权利，不在相同或类似的条件下适用内国的

7、诉讼立法，不在相同或类似的条件下给予内国法院以司法协助，内国立法或司法机构就可以施以对等的限制。如我国现行的民事诉讼法第5条第2款规定：“外国法院对中华人民共和国公民、法人和其他组织的民事诉讼权利加以限制的，中华人民共和国人民法院对该国公民、企业和组织的民事诉讼权利，实行对等原则。”尊重国际条约和国际惯例原则遵守国际条约和国际惯例原则在国际民事诉讼法领域表现为：一方面，国家在制定国内国际民事诉讼法规范时应考虑到本国所参加、缔结或加入的国际条约的有关规定，应考虑到国际社会在有关方面的习惯作法；另一方面，国家的司法机关在审理有关国际民商事法律争议时应该优先适用其所参加的国际条约的有关规定，或在没有

8、明确的国际立法和国内立法规定的情况下，应该参照国际惯例对有关争议作出公正的处理。第三节 国际民事诉讼当事人的民事诉讼地位（status of parties）外国个人（foreigner）的国际民事诉讼地位外国国家（foreign countries）的国际民事诉讼地位 国际组织（international organizations）的国际民事诉讼地位外国个人的国际民事诉讼地位给予外国人以国民待遇是一般原则 世界各国的民事诉讼立法和有关的国际条约在规范外国人的民事诉讼地位时，原则上都给予外国人以国民待遇，即规定外国人享有与本国国民同等的民事诉讼权利，承担同等的民事诉讼义务，但一般要求以对等互

9、惠为条件。例如我国民事诉讼法第5条的规定。 一般都要求依属人法确定外国人的民事诉讼行为能力 依属人法确定外国人的民事诉讼行为能力已经为国际社会所公认。大陆法系国家如德、日等是依当事人本国法、英美法系国家原则上依当事人住所地法来决定外国人民事诉讼行为能力的同时，还规定，如果依法院地法外国人具有民事诉讼行为能力的，视为有行为能力。一般都对外国人的诉讼代理问题作了特别规定 （1）法定代理人和指定代理人在国际民事诉讼法中一般并不涉及，而委托代理人在国际民事诉讼程序中却往往会产生一些在国内民事诉讼程序中所不可能产生的问题。 （2）关于外国当事人可以委托什么样的人作为诉讼代理人，各国一般都规定应由法院地国

10、的律师担任诉讼代理人。至于诉讼代理人的法定权限问题，采用律师诉讼主义的国家规定，律师可以基于授权实施所有的诉讼行为，行使任何诉讼权利，而采用当事人诉讼主义的国家，如英美普通法系国家规定，不管当事人或其法定代理人是否委托诉讼代理人，他们都必须亲自出庭参与诉讼。 （3）此外，在国际社会的司法实践中，还存在着领事代理制度，即一个国家的驻外领事，可以依据有关国家的立法和国际条约的规定，在其管辖范围内的驻在国法院，依职权代表本国国民参与有关的诉讼程序，以保护有关自然人或法人在驻在国的合法权益。 （4）我国民事诉讼法第241条规定，外国人在我国法院参与诉讼可以亲自进行，也有权通过一定程序委托我国的律师或其

11、他公民代为进行。最高人民法院于1992年印发的关于适用中华人民共和国民事诉讼法若干问题意见也在第30条中明确规定，涉外民事诉讼中的外籍当事人，还可以委托其本国人为诉讼代理人，也可以委托其本国律师以非律师身份担任诉讼代理人。外国驻华使、领馆官员，受本国公民的委托，可以以个人名义担任诉讼代理人，但在诉讼中不享有外交特权和豁免权。与此同时，我国是维也纳领事关系公约的缔约国，外国人所属国的领事可以依据该公约的有关规定和我国同有关国家签订的领事条约在我国法院代理其本国国民的诉讼行为。 （5）我国民事诉讼法规定，在中华人民共和国领域内没有住所的外国人、无国籍人、外国企业和组织委托中华人民共和国律师或者其他

12、人代理诉讼，从中华人民共和国领域外寄交或者托交的授权委托书，应当经所在国公证机关证明，并经中华人民共和国驻该国使领馆认证，或者履行中华人民共和国与该所在国订立的有关条约中规定的证明手续后，才具有效力。授权委托书是一种重要的诉讼文书，它表示委托人的行为由代理人行使，甚至代为处分实体权利，因此，授权委托书必须具有真实性与合法性。例如，我国与波兰等国签订的司法协助协定中就有免除认证的规定，由缔约一方法院或者其他主管机关制作或者证明的并加盖印章的文件，不必经过认证，即可在缔约另一国使用。如果缔约另一方国家的当事人完成上述手续，其授权委托便有效。这一规定，只适用在我国没有住所的外国当事人从我国领域外寄交

13、或者托交授权委托书的情况。 （6）对于在我国领域内有住所的外国当事人以及在我国领域内虽无住所，但只是在我国领域内作短期停留的，如旅游、探亲、讲学、经商时，递交授权委托书，无需履行公证、认证手续。 诉讼费用担保制度 （1）指审理国际商事案件的法院依据内国诉讼法的规定，要求作为原告的外国人在起诉时提供以后可能判决由他负担的诉讼费用的担保。在现代国际社会，一些国家不要求外国原告提供诉讼费用担保，其他各国的法律都在不同程度上对外国原告规定了该项义务。 （2）这种担保制度中的诉讼费用仅是指除了案件受理费（案件受理费具有国家税收性质，应上缴国库）以外的为进行诉讼所必需而应由当事人负担的实际开支，诸如当事人

14、、证人、鉴定人、翻译人员的差旅费、出庭费等。 （3）我国最高人民法院在1984年通过的民事诉讼收费办法（试行）第14条第2款规定：“外国人、无国籍人、外国企业和组织在人民法院进行诉讼，应当对诉讼费用提供担保。”不过，我国在同法国、波兰、比利时等国订立的司法协助条约中，互相免除了提供诉讼费用担保的义务。经历了从要求外国人提供担保到实行在互惠前提下互免担保的变迁过程。这种规定一般也及于法人。 （4）需要注意的问题：诉讼费用担保与诉讼费用的预交二者不能混同；关于免除诉讼费用保证金的主体资格的界定。中国目前跟外国缔结的司法协助协定采取两种不同的标准：其一是采用单一的国籍标准。例如中国跟法国、比利时、蒙

15、古、罗马尼亚、西班牙、俄罗斯等国签署的司法协助协定通常就作了如下规定：缔约一方的法院对于另一方国民，不得因为他们是外国人而令其提供诉讼费用保证金。其二是采用国籍加住所的复合标准，即缔约一方国民要在缔约另一国领域内免除诉讼费用保证金，不但要具有缔约一方的国籍，而且还必须在缔约一方领域内设有住所或居所。例如中国和波兰、意大利签署的司法协助协定就作了这样的规定；关于免除诉讼费用保证金的范围。目前中国跟外国缔结的司法协助条约，通常对此不作明确规定，只是概括地规定免除诉讼费用保证金，至于其具体范围留待各缔约国的国内法去解决。 案例（诉讼权利能力和诉讼行为能力 ）中国浙江某纺织品进出口公司在杭州市与一位年

16、满21岁的意大利商人签订一笔纺织品原料供货合同。合同签订后，这种纺织品原料的价格在国际市场上暴涨，意大利商人如履行合同将造成巨大亏损。为达到不履行合同，又不承担违约责任的目的，该意大利人提出按意大利法律，他系未成年人，不具有完全民事行为能力，不能成为合同主体，因而他与浙江某纺织品进出口公司签订的供货合同是无效的。浙江某纺织品进出口公司向法院提起诉讼，要求该意大利商人承担违约责任，赔偿损失。法院受理了案件，并进行审理。法院认为：本案合同履行地在中国，应以中国法为准据法。根据我国法律规定，18岁为具有完全民事行为能力人。故该意大利人具有行为能力和诉讼行为能力。浙江某纺织品进出口公司与该意大利人签订

17、的合同有效，该意大利人不履行合同属违约，判令赔偿其违约给浙江某纺织进出口公司造成的损失。案例（领事代理的法律问题）德国籍人尤塔毛雷尔根据中德学术交流计划，来到中国上海市某大学任教。在任教期间与在该大学任教的中国公民某某结婚，后因双方性格不和等因素，尤塔毛雷尔向上海市中级人民法院起诉，要求与某某离婚。起诉后，尤塔毛雷尔任教期满，遂回到本国。由于考虑到诉讼的问题，尤塔毛雷尔向上海市中级人民法院提出，欲委托在上海市任教的某德国籍人或德国驻上海领事馆的工作人员，担任其在离婚诉讼中的诉讼代理人。由于我国法律中没有明确此问题，上海市高级人民法院就是否允许外籍当事人委托居住我国境内的外国人，或本国驻我国领事

18、馆工作人员为诉讼代理人问题，向最高人民法院请示，要求作出司法解释。最高人民法院对此作出批复指出：（1）外籍当事人委托居住我国境内的本国人为诉讼代理人，不违背我国民事诉讼法（试行）（注：当时处于该法施行期间）的规定，可以准许。（2）外国驻华使、领馆官员，受本国国民的委托，以个人名义担任诉讼代理人时，亦应准许。同时根据我国参加的维也纳领事关系公约的规定，外国驻华领事馆官员（包括经我国外交部确认的外国驻华使馆的外交官同时兼有领事官衔者），当作为当事人的本国国民不在我国境内，或由于其他原因不能适时到我国法院出庭时，还可以在没有委托的情况下，直接以领事名义担任其代表或为其安排代表在我国法院出庭。外国国家

19、的国际民事诉讼地位 国家及其财产享受豁免权是国际公法、也是国际民事诉讼法上的一项重要原则，它是指一个国家及其财产未经该国明确同意不得在另一国家的法院被诉，其财产不得被另一国家扣押或用于强制执行。 (1)司法管辖豁免。即未经一国明确同意，任何其他国家的法院都不得受理以该外国国家为被告或者以该外国国家的财产为诉讼标的的案件。不过，与此相反，根据国际社会的一般作法，一国法院却可以受理外国国家作为原告提起的民事诉讼，且该外国法院也可审理该诉讼中被告提起的同该案直接有关的反诉。 (2)诉讼程序豁免。是指未经一国同意，不得强迫其出庭作证或提供证据，不得对该外国的国家财产采取诉讼保全等诉讼程序上的强制措施。

20、 (3)强制执行豁免。非经该外国国家明确同意，受诉法院不得依据有关判决对该外国国家财产实行强制执行。国家及其财产的豁免权，均可通过国家的自愿放弃而排除。放弃豁免，一般认为可以有以下几种方式：(1)通过条约、契约中的有关条款，明示放弃豁免；(2)争议发生后，双方通过协议，明示放弃豁免；(3)主动向他国法院起诉、应诉或提出反诉，即默示放弃豁免；(4)虽不提出豁免主张，但已就对它的诉讼的实质问题采取了诉讼步骤或行为，即默示放弃豁免(但采取的诉讼步骤或行为是为了提出豁免主张的，不得视为放弃豁免)。 我国奉行的是绝对豁免论，但与原来意义上的绝对豁免论也不尽相同。国际组织的国际民事诉讼地位这里所讲的国际组

21、织是指在国际范围内从事活动的由若干国家或政府通过条约设立并取得国际法人格的团体。 就目前国际社会的立法和司法实践来看，国际组织一般都是基于一定的国际条约在有关国家的法院诉讼程序中享有绝对豁免权。我国已加入的相关国际条约成为我国人民法院确定相关国际组织的国际民事诉讼地位时的重要法律依据；至于没有条约依据的国际组织的国际民事诉讼地位问题只能通过外交途径来处理。Judicial resolution of international disputesIn hearing international disputes, national courts may have difficulty secur

22、ing jurisdiction over the parties and discovering evidence. In addition, national courts are limited by two principles of judicial restraint-the act of state doctrine, and the doctrine of sovereign immunity. (1) Judicial ProcedureA party seeking judicial resolution of an international dispute faces

23、several problems, including which nations courts will hear the case and what law should be applied to the case. Many international contracts contain a choice of forum ( or forum-selection ) clause that designates which nations court has jurisdiction to hear a case arising out of the contract. In add

24、ition, many contracts also include a choice of law clause that designates which nations law will be applied in deciding the case. Absent these two clauses, and without the parties agreeing to these matters, an international dispute may never be resolved. To facilitate the deposition of international

25、 law disputes, the United States has entered into several treaties concerning legal procedure. The 1965 Convention on the Service Abroad of Judicial and Extra-judicial Documents in Civil and Commercial Matters establishes a procedure for serving judicial papers on parties located in other countries.

26、 The 1970 Hague Convention on the Taking of Evidence Abroad in Civil and Commercial Matters provides a procedure for conducting discovery in other countries. (2) Act of State DoctrineA general principle of international law is that a country has absolute authority over what transpires within its own

27、 territory. In furtherance of this principle, the act of state doctrine states that judges of one country cannot question the validity of an act committed by another country within that other countrys own borders. In United States v. Belmont, the U.S. Supreme Court declared, Every sovereign state mu

28、st recognize the independence of every other sovereign state; and the courts of one will not sit in judgment upon the acts of the government of another, done within its own territory. This restraint on the judiciary is justified under the doctrine of separation of powers and permits the executive br

29、anch of the federal government to arrange affairs with foreign governments. (3) The doctrine of sovereign immunityOne of the oldest principles of international law is the doctrine of sovereign immunity. Under this doctrine, countries are granted immunity form suits in courts in others countries. Ori

30、ginally, the United States granted absolute immunity to foreign governments from suits in U.S. courts. In 1952, the United States switched to the principle of qualified or restricted immunity, which was eventually codified in the Foreign Sovereign Immunity Act of 1976. This act provides that a forei

31、gn country is not immune from lawsuits in U. S. courts in the following two situations: (i) the foreign country has waived its immunity, either explicitly or by implication.(ii) the action is based upon a commercial activity carried on in the United States by the foreign country or carried on outsid

32、e the United States but causing a direct effect in the United States.Introduction to International Civil Procedure LawAs the international dimension of business is on the increase so there is the risk of transnational trade disputes. Courts are now frequently asked to decide on disputes with a forei

33、gn party. Rules in respect to international jurisdiction are not always in tune with one another. (1) Each country has its own rules on jurisdiction. These rules are often different in the different legal systems. In the United States, for instance, the courts are considered to have jurisdiction not

34、 only over a defendant established there but also over a foreign person or company regularly doing business in the United States. United States courts sometimes even exercise jurisdiction over a foreigner, who is served with a writ in the United States, while on an occasional business visit there. E

35、uropean courts often use more rigid standards to decide on their jurisdiction.(2) Courts of more than one country may declare themselves simultaneously competent to give judgment in a dispute, so that the same claim can be the subject of proceedings in different countries. In most countries, the leg

36、islator does not recognize the international lis pendens as a ground for lack of competence. The courts sometimes avoid giving judgment of the court will probably be recognized in their jurisdiction. This is, for instance, the case in France, Germany, The Netherlands and Switzerland. In a few legal

37、systems, such as the English, the lis pendens is a more general exception for court jurisdiction. Some treaties such as the European judgment Convention ( Brussels Convention, the Lugano Convention and bilateral conventions on jurisdiction) avoid lis pendens by granting jurisdiction to only one cour

38、t. Any other court, seized by the case, has to declare itself devoid of jurisdiction. Lis pendens may result in conflicting judgments. Clear rules on jurisdiction and lis pendens are therefore required. (3) The summons of a foreign party gives rise to specific legal questions, since a summons or wri

39、t is basically an administrative act which can not be instituted outside national boundaries. The delivery of a summons or writ abroad is only possible with the permission and cooperation of the local administration. International rules are therefore needed for the service abroad of a writ and other

40、 judicial documents. Each court conducts its legal proceedings according to its national procedural law. However, foreign substantive law must sometimes be applied to a dispute and, if needs be, the court may have to inquire into the substantive rules of this foreign law, gather evidence, or organiz

41、e a hearing in another country. Treaties organize this international procedural cooperation. (4) Finally, judgments passed in one country sometimes need to be recognized or enforced in another country. Recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments is often regulated by treaties. Procedure in gene

42、ralOnce a court or other authority takes jurisdiction over an international legal dispute, the next essential question is that of deciding what special rules of procedure should be applied to non-standard disputes presenting other than domestic elements, because the general rules of procedure are or

43、dained by the legislator for application to internal civil (commercial or economic) litigations. Nevertheless, throughout the history of legal development, the legislator has increasingly relied on more and more differentiated rules to express the actual specificity that characterizes several aspect

44、s of foreign element proceedings and therefore calls for specific solutions in procedural law. The law of international civil procedure has grown into a far-flung system of institutions, on which Hungarian literate too has produced a large monograph ( International civil Procedure, by Szaszy). The m

45、ain rules of procedure in domestic and international legislation(1) The main general rules of procedure governing international litigation may be said, by way of theoretical generalization, to be basically of two kinds. On the one hand, they generally include the domestic rules of procedure which ar

46、e applied with no regard to the international character of litigation precisely because specified matters and international legal disputes in general are subject by rules of international civil procedure to the domestic law of procedure. It is so provided by Art. 63 of the Code: save to otherwise pr

47、ovided for therein, proceedings before Hungarian courts or other authorities are, even in matters of international litigation, subject to Hungarian law. This is then the general rule which does not, of course, transform the domestic law of civil procedure because it serves as a guide to a fictitious

48、 conflict situation in the procedural area, namely to the application of the lex fori as the general rule.(2) On the other hand, the principal rules of international procedural law are made up of the sum of procedural norms different from the domestic rules of procedural law, representing exceptions

49、 allowed by the Code to the above general rule in view of the international character of litigation. These are the rules of international procedure law strictly so called. They take certain procedural conditions or acts out of the generally applicable domestic law of procedure and give them a differ

50、ent regulation, with the maxim of ius speciale derogat ius generale again coming into operation. The most important of these rules in the Code are the following : (a) the legal and disposing capacity of litigants are governed by their personal law ( nationality, domicile), not by Hungarian law. (b)

51、nevertheless, a foreign national who has restricted or no disposing capacity under his personal law but would have disposing capacity under Hungarian law is deemed to be capable of action in proceedings before Hungarian courts. This, however, does not preclude the possibility for his legal represent

52、ative to act on his behalf abroad. (c) Where, between the parties, a proceeding based on the same facts and on the same claim is instituted before a foreign court or other authority and the resulting decision is recognizable in Hungary under the Code, the Hungarian court or other authority terminate

53、s a proceedings subsequently instituted before it, or the court dismiss the suit without issuing a summons. (d) The Minister of Justice issues a certificate of Hungarian law and legal practice to a person who is in need thereof to assert his right abroad.(3) Certain rules of foreign exchange law hav

54、e also some bearing on civil procedure: permission of the foreign exchange authority is needed if a Hungarian subject at law intends to start a suit for material-financial claim against a foreigner; in the reverse situation, i.e. the suit was instituted against a Hungarian party, of course no permis

55、sion is required, only the fact has to be reported to the foreign exchange authority, and in his procedure the Hungarian party is expected to live up to the rulings of the said authority.(4) As can be seen, the Code may allow exceptions to the general applicability of the domestic law of procedure.

56、Such exceptions include those relating to legal assistance and arbitration to be discussed hereafter. Added to them are exceptions which are allowed to the general rules by international agreements and which, according to Art.2 of the Code, take precedence over domestic law in respect to jurisdictio

57、n or any other matter.In addition, international treaties contain several other special provisions on procedure concerning, among others, the use of language or consular action in matters of succession ( protection and delivery of the estate, etc.) as regulated by agreements on legal assistance and

58、consular conventions. A great number of such provisions are included in every agreement on legal assistance and every consular convention. 思考判断只要有关的实体法律关系或程序法律关系具有外国因素，就构成国际民事诉讼。国际民事诉讼程序是一国民事诉讼程序的特别程序。国家主权原则在国际民事诉讼中表现为国家对与本国有关的案件都可以行使司法管辖权。各国一般依其属人法确定外国人的民事诉讼行为能力。我国法律允许外国人通过委托其领事代理其民事诉讼行为。我国法律允许外国人委

59、托本国律师以非律师身份担任诉讼代理人。规定外国人必须提供诉讼费用担保实质上违反了国民待遇原则。我国目前仍坚持绝对豁免理论，但与以前的绝对豁免理论有所不同。我国目前对外国原告并不收取诉讼费用担保费。司法豁免权包括管辖豁免，诉讼程序豁免和强制执行豁免。第二十六章 国际民事案件的管辖权管辖权的意义管辖权的确定我国立法关于国际民事案件管辖权的规定 管辖权的冲突推荐：国际民事诉讼管辖权研究，刘力著，中国法制出版社2019年版。国际民事案件管辖权的概念国际民事案件管辖权是指一国法院或具有审判权的其他司法机关受理、审判具有国际因素或涉外因素的民商事案件的权限。国际民事案件管辖权问题所涉及和要解决的是某一特定

60、的国际民商事案件究竟由哪一国法院行使管辖权的问题。 区分国际管辖权（international jurisdiction）和国内管辖权（local jurisdiction）。就某一具体国家（如我国）而言，国际民事诉讼法中的管辖权问题主要涉及两方面内容：一是就某一特定的国际民事案件，我国人民法院有没有管辖权的问题；二是指有关的外国法院对某一特定的国际民事案件有没有管辖权的问题。前者又称为“直接的一般管辖权”；后者是指外国法院的判决能否在我国境内得到承认和执行的问题，又称为“间接的一般管辖权”。国际民事案件管辖权的种类对人诉讼管辖权和对物诉讼管辖权属地管辖权和属人管辖权专属管辖权和任意管辖权强制