Read more
The second thematic volume in the series
Studies in Private International Law - Asia looks into direct jurisdiction, that is, the situations in which the courts of 15 key Asian states (Mainland China, Hong Kong, Taiwan, Japan, South Korea, Malaysia, Singapore, Thailand, Vietnam, Cambodia, Myanmar, the Philippines, Indonesia, Sri Lanka, and India) are prepared to hear a case involving cross-border elements. For instance, where parties are habitually resident abroad and a dispute has only some, little or no connection with an Asian state, will the courts of that state accept jurisdiction and hear the case and (if so) on what conditions? More specifically, the book's chapters explore the circumstances in which different Asian states assume or decline jurisdiction not just in commercial matters, but also in other types of action (such as family, consumer and employment disputes).
The Introduction defines terminology and identifies similarities in the approaches to direct jurisdiction taken by the 15 Asian states in civil and commercial litigation. Taking its cue from this, the Conclusion assesses whether there should be a multilateral convention or soft law instrument articulating principles of direct jurisdiction for Asia. The Conclusion also discusses possible trajectories that Asian states may be taking in respect of direct jurisdiction in light of the COVID-19 pandemic and the political tensions currently besetting the world. The book suggests that enacting suitable rules of direct jurisdiction requires an Asian state to strike a delicate balance between affording certainty and protecting its nationals. At heart, direct jurisdiction involves sometimes difficult policy considerations and is not just about drawing up lists of jurisdictional grounds and exceptions to them.
List of contents
1.
IntroductionWilson Lui, independent researcher in law and Anselmo Reyes, Doshisha University, Japan2.
China Zhengyi Zhang, Shanghai University of Political Science and Law, China and Jianping Shi, Shanghai University of Political Science and Law, China3.
Hong Kong James Y P Wong, Dentons Hong Kong LLP4.
Taiwan Fuldien Li, Chinese Culture University, Taiwan and Rong-Chwan Chen, National Taipei University, Taiwan5.
Japan Kazuaki Nishioka, University of Zurich, Switzerland6.
South Korea Sungjae Chun, Jipyong LLC, Korea7.
Singapore Wilson Lui, independent researcher in law8.
Malaysia Nitin V Nadkarni, arbitrator and counsel, Malaysia and Wai Fung Teh, lawyer, Malaysia9.
Vietnam Nguyen Thi Hong Trinh, Hue University, Vietnam, Ho Minh Thanh, Hue University, Vietnam and Hoang Thao Anh, Hue University, Vietnam10.
Cambodia Nobumichi Teramura, University of Brunei Darussalam, Brunei11.
Myanmar Zaw Thura, District Judge at the Western Yangon District Court, Myanmar12.
Philippines Arvin Kristopher A Razon, De La Salle University, Philippines, Jocelyn P Cruz, De La Salle University, Philippines and Justin DJ Sucgang, De La Salle University, Philippines13.
Indonesia Afifah Kusumadara, Brawijaya University, Indonesia14.
Thailand Akawat Laowonsiri, Thammasat University, Thailand15.
Sri Lanka Ramesh Fernando, Junior Counsel, Chambers of Geoffrey Alagaratnam, PC, Sri Lanka16.
India Sai Ramani Garimella, South Asian University, India17.
Conclusion Anselmo Reyes, Doshisha University, Japan and Wilson Lui, independent researcher in law
About the author
Anselmo Reyes is Guest Professor at the Law Faculty of Doshisha University in Kyoto, Japan and an International Judge of the Singapore International Commercial Court.Wilson Lui is part-time Lecturer at the Faculty of Law of the University of Hong Kong. He is a Chartered Linguist, and a Fellow of the Chartered Institute of Arbitrators. He holds an MPhil from the University of Oxford, UK, and an LLM from the University of Cambridge, UK.
Summary
The second thematic volume in the series Studies in Private International Law – Asia looks into direct jurisdiction, that is, the situations in which the courts of 15 key Asian states (Mainland China, Hong Kong, Taiwan, Japan, South Korea, Malaysia, Singapore, Thailand, Vietnam, Cambodia, Myanmar, the Philippines, Indonesia, Sri Lanka, and India) are prepared to hear a case involving cross-border elements. For instance, where parties are habitually resident abroad and a dispute has only some, little or no connection with an Asian state, will the courts of that state accept jurisdiction and hear the case and (if so) on what conditions? More specifically, the book’s chapters explore the circumstances in which different Asian states assume or decline jurisdiction not just in commercial matters, but also in other types of action (such as family, consumer and employment disputes).
The Introduction defines terminology and identifies similarities in the approaches to direct jurisdiction taken by the 15 Asian states in civil and commercial litigation. Taking its cue from this, the Conclusion assesses whether there should be a multilateral convention or soft law instrument articulating principles of direct jurisdiction for Asia. The Conclusion also discusses possible trajectories that Asian states may be taking in respect of direct jurisdiction in light of the COVID-19 pandemic and the political tensions currently besetting the world. The book suggests that enacting suitable rules of direct jurisdiction requires an Asian state to strike a delicate balance between affording certainty and protecting its nationals. At heart, direct jurisdiction involves sometimes difficult policy considerations and is not just about drawing up lists of jurisdictional grounds and exceptions to them.
Foreword
Intended as a companion volume to the first thematic study in the series Studies in Private International Law – Asia, this book provides expert analysis on the issue of direct jurisdiction in 15 key Asian jurisdictions.
