Forum Non Conveniens

Forum Non Conveniens
the doctrine of forum non conveniens can be employed when the venue, albeit
proper, is inappropriate, inconvenient, or unacceptable for various reasons. It is for a
court to determine, on a case by case basis, whether it is the proper venue in which
to hear the action. This is true even though it has jurisdiction over the parties,
jurisdiction over the subject matter of the case, and is a proper venue in which the
action can be brought.
To exercise the doctrine, there must be an adequate alternative forum in which the
case can be heard. The burden to prove the existence of such an alternate forum is
on the party who moves to transfer the case for forum non conveniens, usually the
defendant. Without an alternate forum, the case must remain in the original forum,
no matter how inconvenient it may be.
Purposes of FNC
1. Ensures that the correct court hears the dispute

2. Supports comity/harmony between the parties
3. Prevents forum shopping
Burden of proof is usually with the defendant to satisfy the court in which the proceeding had
been instituted that is clearly inappropriate forum for the determination of the dispute and that
the continuation would be oppressive and vexatious.
In order to justify FNC two test can be applied:
1. The Defendant must satisfy the court that there is another forum to whose jurisdiction he is
amenable in which justice can be done between the parties at substantially less
inconvenience or expense ; and
2. The stay must not deprive the plaintiff of a legitimate personal or jurisdictional advantage
which would be available to him if he invoked the jurisdiction of the foreign court.
To determine whether another forum is an adequate alternative, the court must

determine whether the alternate forum will hear the case, and whether the
defendants may be served with process in the alternate forum. Usually, the latter
depends on the jurisdiction of the alternate forum over the defendants. Because it is
usually the defendants who move to transfer the case to the alternative forum, the
defendants will often consent to such jurisdiction. If the defendants refused to
consent, the case would remain in the original forum, which is exactly what the
defendants were attempting to avoid.
Clearly Inappropriate forum can be determined by the following factors:
1. Availability of the witnesses

2. Parties place of business
3. The law of the cause (lex causae)
4. Any legitimate or juridical advantage available in current forum
In situations where the defendant seeks to employ the doctrine of forum non
conveniens and names a court in a foreign country as an alternative forum, the
original court will take many factors into consideration, such as: whether the foreign
court will apply foreign substantive law; whether the plaintiff will be prejudiced by
transfer to a foreign court; and whether the foreign court will be fair.
It should be noted, however, that the plaintiffs initial choice of forum is given
deference. Even if there are more reasons to grant the motion for forum non
conveniens than to deny it, the deference may still control and the court may hold on
to the case. The reasons to grant the motion to move the case must be extremely
persuasive.
In particular, forum non conveniens only arises and applies when the alternative forum is
in a foreign country.
When a forum non conveniens motion is granted, the case is not dismissed;
instead,the case is transferred to the adequate alternative forum.
Most significant relationship rule
According to center of gravity doctrine, when ever there is a choice-of-law question,

the law of the jurisdiction with the most significant relationship to the transaction or event
applies. Center-of-Gravity Doctrine is also known as significant-relationship theory or
grouping-of-contacts theory
a legal theory that if there is a question as to which law applies in a dispute, the law of the country
with the most significant relationship to the event and parties applies
Under this [center of gravity] theory, the courts, instead of regarding as conclusive the parties
intention, or the place of making or performance, lay emphasis rather upon the law of the place
which has the most significant contacts with the matter in dispute

Forum Non Conveniens

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Forum Non Conveniens

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Forum Non Conveniens

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Forum Non Conveniens

1. Ensures that the correct court hears the dispute

In order to justify FNC two test can be applied:

To determine whether another forum is an adequate alternative, the court must

1. Availability of the witnesses

Most significant relationship rule

According to center of gravity doctrine, when ever there is a choice-of-law question,

You might also like

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.