法律图书馆>>法律论文资料库>>全文
香港法院审理案件中的法律论证过程 ——以United Phosphorus LTD v. China Merchants Shipping & Enterprises Co Ltd 上诉审为例/陈汉瑛(21)
(iv) The existing proceedings. If a stay was to be granted, the judge plainly regarded the fact that proceedings had already been issued in the Guangzhou Maritime Court as the most significant factor in favour of a stay. Those proceedings had been commenced by the Defendant against the sellers and their agents in respect of the documents which purported to be the bills of lading, and the Guangzhou Maritime Court had accepted jurisdiction to hear the case. Thus, it was argued before the judge that, if the current proceedings were stayed, the rights and liabilities of all the parties (not just the Plaintiff and the Defendant) could be decided by a court at the same time, thereby saving time and expense and obviating the risk of inconsistent findings. On this issue, the judge was alive to "the presumption in favour of one-stop adjudication", but said:
"... in my view the Court reasonably could have expected substantially more information from the Defendant as to the existing Guangzhou litigation, in particular as to the manner in which the present litigation between the Plaintiff and Defendant could be related to or assimilated with the current Guangzhou action, whether as part of those proceedings or as an action collateral thereto; and, if the latter, what provision could be made, for example, as to contemporaneous trial before the same judge (and assuming, for this purpose, the absence of any jurisdictional difficulties). This seems to me to be important in the context of the present debate; inconsistency of judicial findings is not a problem arising solely in litigation in parallel jurisdictions, nor for that matter does it seem entirely accurate to assert that the same issues arise for decision before the Hong Kong and Guangzhou courts, broad commonality of background facts notwithstanding. In my view information of this nature is important in a situation in which, as here, the existence and subject matter of related litigation is prayed in aid as an integral element in support of a forum non conveniens application, and I resist the notion that, absent appropriate evidence, the Court should accept an argument bearing within it the assumption that some appropriate form of 'consolidation' (if I may use the term loosely) can be effected within or in the context of the current Guangzhou proceedings."


总共23页     [1]   [2]   [3]   [4]   [5]   [6]   [7]   [8]   [9]   [10]   [11]   [12]   [13]   [14]   [15]   [16]   [17]   [18]   [19]   [20]   21   [22]   [23]  
上一页     下一页    

声明:本论文由《法律图书馆》网站收藏,
仅供学术研究参考使用,
版权为原作者所有,未经作者同意,不得转载。
法律图书馆>>法律论文资料库