我国判决承认与执行中互惠原则实施的困境与出路
|
摘要
我国对互惠原则的适用坚持"事实互惠"立场,加大了互惠关系认定的难度,不仅无助于推动判决自由流动目标的实现,也减损了当事人私人利益的保护。为化解互惠原则对判决的承认与执行造成的障碍,当前域外对该原则的适用和解释呈现出宽松化的趋势。这既有利于摈弃"事实互惠"所蕴含的国家之间对抗和报复思维,也便于维系各国民商事交流的良性发展。作为条约缺位下判决承认与执行的依据,互惠原则既有助于避免对外国司法制度进行评价,也有利于强化本国当事人订立争议解决条款的议价能力,故该原则应予保留而不应废弃。基于对互惠原则宽松化解释之要求,在互惠关系之证明标准上,一国法院曾拒绝承认与执行外国判决的事实并不具有决定意义。在互惠关系之证明责任上,应由被请求人承担。在互惠原则的适用范围上,应将身份和婚姻家庭领域的非金钱判决排除在外。在互惠与礼让的关系上,礼让应是互惠的前提。对互惠原则采取宽松化解释,对全球经贸的整合、国际民商事秩序的稳定,以及对当事人民商事利益的保障,均具有重大的实践意义。
China's adherence to de facto reciprocity in the application of the principle of reciprocity has increased difficulty of judging the existence of reciprocal relationship,which not only hinders the free movement of the judgments,but also detracts from the protection of private interests of the parties. In order to resolve the obstacles caused by the principle of reciprocity in the recognition and enforcement of judgments,the current application and interpretation of the principle have shown a trend of liberalization. The trend is conducive to abandon confrontation and retaliation between countries in the recognition and enforcement of judgments,and helps to maintain the sound development of civil and commercial exchanges among countries. As the basis of recognition and enforcement of judgments in absence of treaty,the principle of reciprocity not only helps a country to avoid evaluation of foreign judicial system,but also conducive to strengthening their parties' bargaining power in negotiating of dispute settlement clause. The principle should be preserved rather than be abandoned. Under requirement of liberal interpretation on the principle of reciprocity,the fact that a court has refused to recognize and enforce a foreign judgment is not decisive in the proof of the existence of reciprocal relationship,the burden of proof in relation to the existence of reciprocal relationship shall be taken by the requested party,and non-pecuniary judgments arising from the area of identity of natural persons as well as marriage and family issues should be excluded in the application of the principle of reciprocity,and comity should be a precondition of reciprocity in the relation between reciprocity and comity. It is of great practical significance to adopt a liberal interpretation of the principle of reciprocity for the integration of the global economy and the stability of the international civil and commercial order,as well as the protection of commercial interests of the parties.
China's adherence to de facto reciprocity in the application of the principle of reciprocity has increased difficulty of judging the existence of reciprocal relationship,which not only hinders the free movement of the judgments,but also detracts from the protection of private interests of the parties. In order to resolve the obstacles caused by the principle of reciprocity in the recognition and enforcement of judgments,the current application and interpretation of the principle have shown a trend of liberalization. The trend is conducive to abandon confrontation and retaliation between countries in the recognition and enforcement of judgments,and helps to maintain the sound development of civil and commercial exchanges among countries. As the basis of recognition and enforcement of judgments in absence of treaty,the principle of reciprocity not only helps a country to avoid evaluation of foreign judicial system,but also conducive to strengthening their parties' bargaining power in negotiating of dispute settlement clause. The principle should be preserved rather than be abandoned. Under requirement of liberal interpretation on the principle of reciprocity,the fact that a court has refused to recognize and enforce a foreign judgment is not decisive in the proof of the existence of reciprocal relationship,the burden of proof in relation to the existence of reciprocal relationship shall be taken by the requested party,and non-pecuniary judgments arising from the area of identity of natural persons as well as marriage and family issues should be excluded in the application of the principle of reciprocity,and comity should be a precondition of reciprocity in the relation between reciprocity and comity. It is of great practical significance to adopt a liberal interpretation of the principle of reciprocity for the integration of the global economy and the stability of the international civil and commercial order,as well as the protection of commercial interests of the parties.
引文
[1]最高人民法院中国应用法学研究所编:《人民法院案例选》(民事、经济、知识产权、海事、民事诉讼程序卷)》,人民法院出版社1997年版。
[2]杜涛:“互惠原则与外国判决的承认与执行”,载《环球法律评论》2007年第1期。
[3]徐崇利:“经济全球化与外国判决承认与执行的互惠原则”,载《厦门大学法律评论》第8辑。
[4]刘仁山:“国际民商事判决承认与执行中的司法礼让原则——对英国与加拿大相关理论及实践的考察”,载《中国法学》2010年第5期。
(1)Susan L. Stevens,Commanding International Judicial Respect:Reciprocity and the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments,26 Hasting International&Comparative Law Review 115(2002–2003).
(2)Justyna Regan,Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments–A Second Attempt in the Hague,14 Richmond Journal of Global Law&Business 84(2015).
(1)Satoshi Watanabe,A Study of a Series of Cases Caused Non-Recognition of a Judicial Judgment between Japan and Mainland China–A Cross-border Garnishment Order of the Japanese Court Issued to a Chinese Company as a Third-Party Debtor,57 Japanese Yearbook of Private International Law 287,290(2014).
(1)最高人民法院[1995]民他字第17号。
(2)Zhang Wenliang,Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in China:A Call for Special Attention to Both the“Due Service Requirement”and the“Principle of Reciprocity”,12 Chinese Journal of International Law 155(2013).
(3)Osaka High Court,Judgment of April 9 2003,Recognition of Foreign Judgment-Judgment of a People’s Republic of China People’s Court-Reciprocity Lacking in the Sense of Article 118(iv)of the Code of Civil Procedure-Effect Not Recognized in Japan,48 Japanese Annual of International Law 171(2005).
(4)自从2003年,并无其他外国判决基于互惠的缺乏而被日本法院拒绝认可。曾经有日本法院的判决指出,中国的判决能够在日本得到认可。例如,东京高等法院2005年9月14日的判决涉及两个中国公民之间的离婚,日本法院拒绝行使管辖权,因为当事人基于相同诉因首先在中国法院提起诉讼,而且将来中国法院作出的判决有望在日本获得认可。再如,东京高等法院在2006年10月30日承认了一个中国公民针对前夫获得扶养费的中国判决。See Tokyo High Court,Judgment of October 30 2006,Child Support and Alimony Payments Between Chinese Nationals-International Adjudicatory Jurisdiction-Applicable Law in Child Support Cases-Applicable Law Concerning Preliminary Questions of the Age of Majority-Effect of Chinese Divorce Judgments-Recognition of Foreign Judgment,51 Japanese Annual of International Law 556(2008).
(5)Yasuhiro Okuda,Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in Japan,15 Yearbook of International Law 418(2013-2014)
(6)该案中,在南京大屠杀中幸存的中国公民针对一个日本研究人员及其著作的出版者提起诉讼,该著作质疑南京大屠杀。在出版物中,日本研究者认为,中国公民并非是一个重要的历史证人,并指责其是虚构历史。在我国法院的诉讼中,原告针对被告毁誉言论要求提供精神损害赔偿。
(1)依据原告的主张,认定互惠关系对外国法院如何适用本国关于判决认可的规则并无关系,只要该规则对外国判决认可的条件与外国相关规定并无实质不同即可。
(2)See Béligh Elbalti,Reciprocity and the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments:A Lot of Bark But not Much Bite,13 Journal of Private International Law 207-208(2017).
(3)Béligh Elbalti,Reciprocity and the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments:A Lot of Bark But not Much Bite,13 Journal of Private International Law 208(2017).
(4)Kwang Hyun SUK,Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in the Republic of Korea,15 Yearbook of Private International Law421(2013-2014).
(5)Seoul District Court,Korea Export Insurance Corporation v. Industrial Bank of China,5 November 1999,Docket No 99 kahap 26523. See Béligh Elbalti,Reciprocity and the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments:A Lot of Bark But not Much Bite,13 Journal of Private International Law 204(2017).
(1)深圳市中级人民法院(2011)深中法民一初字第45号民事裁定书。
(2)该判决涉及德意志某公司与中国某租赁公司一般融资租赁合同纠纷。德国申请人于2001年2月22日向北京市第二中院申请执行德国法兰克福地方法院先后于1998年和1999年作出的《缺席判决》和《关于确定费用的决议》。北京市第二中院认为,由于中德之间既未缔结或者共同参加有关承认商事判决的国际条约,也不存在相互承认对方法院判决的互惠关系,并据此驳回了德国当事人的申请。参见北京市第二中级人民法院(2003)二中民初字第00002号民事调解书。
(3)该案中,俄罗斯国家交响乐团与阿特蒙特有限责任公司于2004年向北京市第二中级人民法院申请承认英国高等法院分别于2002年和2003年作出的中间判决及中间判决的补充判决的法律效力。北京市第二中院亦认为,基于我国与英国之间没有缔结或者参加相关条约,亦未建立相应的互惠关系,故英国判决不应得到认可。参见北京市第二中级人民法院(2004)二中民特字第928号。
(4)该案中,澳大利亚的弗拉西动力发动机有限公司于2006年向深圳市中级人民法院申请承认和执行澳大利亚法院作出的判决。后经广东省高院于2006年11月28日向最高人民法院请示,最高人民法院2007年3月11日在《关于申请人弗拉西动力发动机有限公司申请承认和执行澳大利亚法院判决议案的请示的批复》中认为,我国与澳大利亚联邦之间没有缔结或者参加相互承认和执行法院民事判决、裁定的国际条约,亦未建立相应的互惠关系,因此驳回弗拉西动力发动机有限公司的申请。参见最高人民法院(2006)民四他字第45号。
(5)See Béligh Elbalti,Reciprocity and the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments:A Lot of Bark But not Much Bite,13 Journal of Private International Law 203(2017).
(6)南京市中级人民法院(2016)苏01协外认3号民事裁定书。
(7)此外,就我国法院承认与执行外国判决的实践来看,在我国与外国缔结相关国际条约时,我国法院均积极对外国判决予以认可。相关代表性案件包括2013年“Uzprommashimpeks国家股份公司请求承认与执行乌兹别克斯坦共和国塔什干市经济法庭判决案”、2001年“意大利B&T Ceramic Group s. r. l.有限公司申请承认和执行米兰法院破产判决案”、2014年“波兰弗里古波尔股份有限公司申请承认和执行波兰共和国法院判决案”。分别参见最高人民法院[2014]民四他字第9号;刘建红:“申请承认和执行意大利法院破产裁决案”,载《中国法律》2003年第3期;宁波市中级人民法院(2013)浙甬民确字第1号民事裁定书。
(1)L. R. Kiestra,The Impact of the ECHR on Private International Law:An Analysis of Strasbourg and Selected National Case Law,Springer,2014,p. 202.
(2)参见瑞士《关于国际私法的联邦法》第25条、第166条第1款c项之规定。
(3)See Béligh Elbalti,Reciprocity and the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments:A Lot of Bark But not Much Bite,13 Journal of Private International Law 187-188(2017).
(1)例如,罗马尼亚保留互惠原则是基于以往罗马尼亚法院将互惠作为判决承认与执行的依据。突尼斯则是将互惠要求被作为一种“安全价值”,从而确保突尼斯在承认与执行外国判决时能够考虑国家主权。See Béligh Elbalti,Reciprocity and the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments:A Lot of Bark But not Much Bite,13 Journal of Private International Law 188-189(2017).
(2)See Béligh Elbalti,Reciprocity and the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments:A Lot of Bark But not Much Bite,13 Journal of Private International Law 192-193(2017).
(3)id.,193(2017).
(4)Supreme Court of Japan,June 7,1983. Private International Law-Enforcement of Foreign(The District of Columbia,U. S. A.)Judgment-Public Order-Reciprocity(Mutual Guarantee),27 Japanese Annual of International Law 120-121(1984).
(5)Yuri Komuro,Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments,52 Japanese Yearbook of Private International Law 610(2009).
(6)See Nozomi Tada,Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in Japan Regarding Business Activities,46 Japanese Annual of International Law 91-92(2003).
(7)T. Kono,N. Tada&M. Shin,Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments Relating to IP Rights and Unfair Competition,in J. Basedow,T. Kono&A. Metzger(eds),Intellectual Property in the Global Arena,MohrS iebeck,2010,p. 329.
(1)German Züblin International Co. Ltd v. Wuxi Walker General Engineeering Co. Ltd.,The Higher Regional Court of Berlin,Order of May 182006,File 20 Sch 13/04.
(2)例如,德国胡克拉床垫和软垫家具厂有限公司于2009年基于德国柏林高等法院的上述判决,向北京市第二中级人民法院申请承认并执行德国奥芬堡州法院的判决。对此,我国最高人民法院在《关于申请承认(及执行)德意志联邦共和国奥芬堡州法院第20460/07判决一案的请示的复函》中,不认可德国奥芬堡州法院以邮寄方式向被申请人北京富克拉家具销售有限公司送达判决书,建议北京二中院向胡克拉公司释明并告知其在完成我国法律认可的送达程序后再申请承认和执行,如果胡克拉公司仍坚持申请,则裁定驳回其申请。显然,该案中我国法院并未基于互惠关系的缺乏为由拒绝承认与执行德国判决。参见最高人民法院[2010]民四他字第81号。
(3)Hubei Gezhouba Sanlian Industrial Co.,Ltd. and Hubei Pinghu Cruise Co.,Ltd. v. Robinson Helicopter Company,Inc. 06-01798(C. D.Cal. 2009). Also see He Qisheng,Hubei Gezhouba Sanlian Indus. Co. v. Robinson Helicopter Co.,21 Asia Pacific Law Review 135-140(2013).
(4)Hubei Gezhouba Sanlian Ind.,et al v. Robinson Helicopter Company,No. 09-56629(9th Cir. 2011).
(5)尽管如此,也有学者认为单纯凭借加州地区法院执行中国判决的个案,还很难跨越中美之间的互惠障碍。参见谢新胜:“条约与互惠缺失时中国判决的域外执行——以美国法院执行中国民商事判决第一案为视角”,载《环球法律评论》2010年第4期。
(6)参见武汉市中级人民法院(2015)鄂武汉中民商外初字第00026号民事裁定书。
(7)See H. Carmon,Foreign Judgments In Israel:Recognition and Enforcement,Springer,2012,pp. 71-72.
(8)See Béligh Elbalti,Reciprocity and the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments:A Lot of Bark But not Much Bite,13 Journal of Private International Law 196(2017).
(1)See H. Peled,Voluntary Reciprocity Agreement:Enforcement of a PRC Court Judgment By an Israel Court in the Absence of a Governing Reciprocity Agreement,available at http://www. tsinghuachinalawupdate. org/single-post/2015/11/15/Voluntary-Reciprocity-Enforcement-ofa-PRC-Court-Judgment-by-an-Israeli-Court-inthe-Absence-of-a-Governing-Reciprocity-Agreement,last visited on 15 July,2018.
(2)参见丁国锋:“以色列高等法院承认并执行中国法院判决”,参见法制网:http://www. legaldaily. com. cn/international/content/2017-08/17/content_7284448. htm? node=81916,最后访问日期:2018-08-30。
(3)依据俄罗斯的法律,除了一些特定类型的案件,除非与外国存在条约义务,外国判决在俄罗斯不应得到认可。换言之,在无条约义务的情况下,俄罗斯法院可以拒绝承认与执行外国判决。See Anna Grishchenkova,Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in Russia–Recent Trends,14 Yearbook of Private International Law 439(2013-2014).
(4)莫斯科地区联邦商事法院于2006年3月2日驳回了一项针对下级法院的上诉并认为,在不存在国际条约的情况下,英国法院的判决能够基于互惠和国际礼让得到俄罗斯法院的执行。而且,俄罗斯法院在解释条约义务之要求时认为,所谓条约义务不仅包括直接处理判决承认与执行的国际条约,也包括与欧洲国家签订的诸如伙伴协定(partnership agreements)在内的国际条约。对于俄罗斯法院而言,应依据欧洲人权法院的实践,将判决的承认与执行的问题解释为《欧洲人权公约》第6条规定的诉诸司法权之内在构成部分。See Béligh Elbalti,Reciprocity and the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments:A Lot of Bark But not Much Bite,13 Journal of Private International Law 198(2017).
(5)该案涉及荷兰法院针对荷兰公司和俄罗斯公司之间的商事租约争议所作判决在俄罗斯的认可问题。初审法院认为,俄罗斯法律关于外国判决的承认与执行的依据并非仅为国际条约或联邦法,也包含互惠和国际礼让等法律原则。即便在没有条约(包括伙伴协定)的情况下,作为俄罗斯联邦宪法认可的一般原则,互惠和国际礼让可以作为俄罗斯法院赋予外国判决效力的依据。该案的裁判随后得到上诉法院和俄罗斯联邦最高商事法院所认可。(Rentpool B. V. v. Podjemnye Tekhnologii,Decision of the Commercial Court of Moscow Region NoА41-9613/09 of 5 June 2009,available at http://iurisprudentia. ru/files/case. pdf,last visited on 30 July,2018.)此外,关于莫斯科巡回上诉法院2009年6月29日的裁判及俄罗斯联邦最高法院2009年12月7日的裁判,参见C. Lightfoot,Hope on Russian Enforcement,International Financial Law Review,10 March 2010,p. 38.
(6)尽管俄罗斯和美国之间并无相关条约,莫斯科国家商业法庭于2011年11月基于互惠和国际礼让执行了美国纽约州地区法院的一项判决。See K. Krasnokutskiy,Russian Commercial Court Enforces a Judgment of a US NY District Court,available at http://navicus. ru/files/Enforcement%20of%20US%20jugdment%20in%20Russia. pdf,last visited on 30 July,2018.
(7)2011年11月8日,圣彼得堡市和列宁格勒地区商事仲裁法庭拒绝承认德国法院作出的宣告一个德国人破产的判决,原因是德国和俄罗斯之间并不存在相关条约。但是,俄罗斯联邦西北巡回商事仲裁法庭在上诉审中将之发回重审并指出,在俄罗斯与外国之间没有条约的情况下,外国破产判决也可以基于互惠被认可。在重审程序中,仲裁法庭最终认可德国的判决。Available at http://iurisprudentia. ru/files/facts. pdf,last visited on 15 July 30 2017.
(8)该案中,值得注意的是,判决债务人主张不应认可俄罗斯的判决,因为俄罗斯法律规定在无条约的情况下,不应承认与执行外国判决。以色列法院拒绝了判决债务人提出的抗辩并认为,俄罗斯的判例法明确表明,俄罗斯法律并未排除在俄罗斯与外国不存在条约的情况下,承认与执行外国判决的可能性。See Haggai Carmon,Foreign Judgments in Israel:Recognition and Enforcement,Springer,2012,p. 72.
(9)荷兰法院在实践中常常愿意承认与执行外国的判决。荷兰法律对于外国判决的承认与执行问题保持相当开放的态度。See R.van Rooij&M. V. Polak,Private International Law in Netherlands,Kluwer Law,1987,p. 73.
(10)Rentpool B. V. v. Podjemnye Tekhnologii,Decision of the Commercial Court of Moscow Region NoА41-9613/09 of 5 June 2009,available at http://iurisprudentia. ru/files/case. pdf,last visited on July 30,2018.
(1)See Béligh Elbalti,Reciprocity and the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments:A Lot of Bark But not Much Bite,13 Journal of Private International Law 191(2017).
(2)F. Ramos Romeu,Litigation under the Shadow of an Exequatur:The Spanish Recognition of U. S. Judgments,38 The International Lawyer945(2004).
(3)John F. Coyle,Rethinking Judgment Reciprocity,92 North Carolina Law Review 1109(2014).
(1)Friedrich K. Juenger,The Recognition of Money Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters,36 American Journal of Comparative Law 32(1988).
(2)Ngoc Bich Du,Cross-Border Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in Vietnam,4 Journal of Private International Law 482(2008).
(3)H. Z. Kryshtalowych&C. T. Salomon,Enforcing Foreign Arbitral Awards and Foreign Judgments in Ukraine,12 American Review of International Arbitration 425(2001).
(4)T. Bondaryev,M. Malskyy&V. Yaremko,Ukraine,in M. Moedritzer&K. C. Whittaker(eds),Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in 28Jurisdiction Worldwide 2013,Law Business Research,2012,p. 138.
(5)Cowans v. Ticinderoga Pulp&Paper Co.,219 App. Div 120.
(6)该建议草案第7条第1款规定,如果法院发现美国法院的类似判决不能在判决来源国法院得到承认和执行,则外国判决在美国不应被承认或执行。See R. A. Brand,Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments,Federal Judicial Center International Litigation Guide,2012,pp. 11-12.
(7)See John F. Coyle,Rethinking Judgment Reciprocity,92 North Carolina Law Review 1109(2014).
(8)See Béligh Elbalti,Reciprocity and the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments:A Lot of Bark But not Much Bite,13 Journal of Private International Law 218(2017).
(9)截至2017年2月,我国与外国签订的包含民商事方面内容的司法协助条约情况如下:民刑事司法协助条约19项(全部生效)、民商事司法协助条约20项(17项生效)。而且,其中部分司法协助条约的内容并不包括判决的承认与执行问题的规定。外交部网站:http://www. fmprc. gov. cn/web/ziliao_674904/tytj_674911/wgdwdjdsfhzty_674917/t1215630. shtml,最后访问日期:2018-08-30。
(10)正因如此,一些日本学者一般倾向于保留互惠要求,以便拒绝认可中国判决。Satoshi Watanabe,A Study of a Series of Cases Caused Non-Recognition of a Judicial Judgment between Japan and Mainland China–A Cross-border Garnishment Order of the Japanese Court Issued to a Chinese Company as a Third-Party Debtor,57 Japanese Yearbook of Private International Law 302(2014).
(1)Samuel P. Baumgartner,Understanding the Obstacles to the Recognition and Enforcement of U. S. Judgments Abroad,44 New York Journal of International Law and Policy 974(2013).
(2)例如,尽管互惠受到德国学者的诸多批评,但是德国政府认为目前取消互惠的实践并不成熟,而决定仍对之予以保留。See Dieter Martiny,Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Money Judgments in the Federal Republic of Germany,35 American Journal of Comparative Law749(1987).
(1)See Béligh Elbalti,Reciprocity and the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments:A Lot of Bark But not Much Bite,13 Journal of Private International Law 218(2017).
[2]杜涛:“互惠原则与外国判决的承认与执行”,载《环球法律评论》2007年第1期。
[3]徐崇利:“经济全球化与外国判决承认与执行的互惠原则”,载《厦门大学法律评论》第8辑。
[4]刘仁山:“国际民商事判决承认与执行中的司法礼让原则——对英国与加拿大相关理论及实践的考察”,载《中国法学》2010年第5期。
(1)Susan L. Stevens,Commanding International Judicial Respect:Reciprocity and the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments,26 Hasting International&Comparative Law Review 115(2002–2003).
(2)Justyna Regan,Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments–A Second Attempt in the Hague,14 Richmond Journal of Global Law&Business 84(2015).
(1)Satoshi Watanabe,A Study of a Series of Cases Caused Non-Recognition of a Judicial Judgment between Japan and Mainland China–A Cross-border Garnishment Order of the Japanese Court Issued to a Chinese Company as a Third-Party Debtor,57 Japanese Yearbook of Private International Law 287,290(2014).
(1)最高人民法院[1995]民他字第17号。
(2)Zhang Wenliang,Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in China:A Call for Special Attention to Both the“Due Service Requirement”and the“Principle of Reciprocity”,12 Chinese Journal of International Law 155(2013).
(3)Osaka High Court,Judgment of April 9 2003,Recognition of Foreign Judgment-Judgment of a People’s Republic of China People’s Court-Reciprocity Lacking in the Sense of Article 118(iv)of the Code of Civil Procedure-Effect Not Recognized in Japan,48 Japanese Annual of International Law 171(2005).
(4)自从2003年,并无其他外国判决基于互惠的缺乏而被日本法院拒绝认可。曾经有日本法院的判决指出,中国的判决能够在日本得到认可。例如,东京高等法院2005年9月14日的判决涉及两个中国公民之间的离婚,日本法院拒绝行使管辖权,因为当事人基于相同诉因首先在中国法院提起诉讼,而且将来中国法院作出的判决有望在日本获得认可。再如,东京高等法院在2006年10月30日承认了一个中国公民针对前夫获得扶养费的中国判决。See Tokyo High Court,Judgment of October 30 2006,Child Support and Alimony Payments Between Chinese Nationals-International Adjudicatory Jurisdiction-Applicable Law in Child Support Cases-Applicable Law Concerning Preliminary Questions of the Age of Majority-Effect of Chinese Divorce Judgments-Recognition of Foreign Judgment,51 Japanese Annual of International Law 556(2008).
(5)Yasuhiro Okuda,Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in Japan,15 Yearbook of International Law 418(2013-2014)
(6)该案中,在南京大屠杀中幸存的中国公民针对一个日本研究人员及其著作的出版者提起诉讼,该著作质疑南京大屠杀。在出版物中,日本研究者认为,中国公民并非是一个重要的历史证人,并指责其是虚构历史。在我国法院的诉讼中,原告针对被告毁誉言论要求提供精神损害赔偿。
(1)依据原告的主张,认定互惠关系对外国法院如何适用本国关于判决认可的规则并无关系,只要该规则对外国判决认可的条件与外国相关规定并无实质不同即可。
(2)See Béligh Elbalti,Reciprocity and the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments:A Lot of Bark But not Much Bite,13 Journal of Private International Law 207-208(2017).
(3)Béligh Elbalti,Reciprocity and the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments:A Lot of Bark But not Much Bite,13 Journal of Private International Law 208(2017).
(4)Kwang Hyun SUK,Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in the Republic of Korea,15 Yearbook of Private International Law421(2013-2014).
(5)Seoul District Court,Korea Export Insurance Corporation v. Industrial Bank of China,5 November 1999,Docket No 99 kahap 26523. See Béligh Elbalti,Reciprocity and the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments:A Lot of Bark But not Much Bite,13 Journal of Private International Law 204(2017).
(1)深圳市中级人民法院(2011)深中法民一初字第45号民事裁定书。
(2)该判决涉及德意志某公司与中国某租赁公司一般融资租赁合同纠纷。德国申请人于2001年2月22日向北京市第二中院申请执行德国法兰克福地方法院先后于1998年和1999年作出的《缺席判决》和《关于确定费用的决议》。北京市第二中院认为,由于中德之间既未缔结或者共同参加有关承认商事判决的国际条约,也不存在相互承认对方法院判决的互惠关系,并据此驳回了德国当事人的申请。参见北京市第二中级人民法院(2003)二中民初字第00002号民事调解书。
(3)该案中,俄罗斯国家交响乐团与阿特蒙特有限责任公司于2004年向北京市第二中级人民法院申请承认英国高等法院分别于2002年和2003年作出的中间判决及中间判决的补充判决的法律效力。北京市第二中院亦认为,基于我国与英国之间没有缔结或者参加相关条约,亦未建立相应的互惠关系,故英国判决不应得到认可。参见北京市第二中级人民法院(2004)二中民特字第928号。
(4)该案中,澳大利亚的弗拉西动力发动机有限公司于2006年向深圳市中级人民法院申请承认和执行澳大利亚法院作出的判决。后经广东省高院于2006年11月28日向最高人民法院请示,最高人民法院2007年3月11日在《关于申请人弗拉西动力发动机有限公司申请承认和执行澳大利亚法院判决议案的请示的批复》中认为,我国与澳大利亚联邦之间没有缔结或者参加相互承认和执行法院民事判决、裁定的国际条约,亦未建立相应的互惠关系,因此驳回弗拉西动力发动机有限公司的申请。参见最高人民法院(2006)民四他字第45号。
(5)See Béligh Elbalti,Reciprocity and the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments:A Lot of Bark But not Much Bite,13 Journal of Private International Law 203(2017).
(6)南京市中级人民法院(2016)苏01协外认3号民事裁定书。
(7)此外,就我国法院承认与执行外国判决的实践来看,在我国与外国缔结相关国际条约时,我国法院均积极对外国判决予以认可。相关代表性案件包括2013年“Uzprommashimpeks国家股份公司请求承认与执行乌兹别克斯坦共和国塔什干市经济法庭判决案”、2001年“意大利B&T Ceramic Group s. r. l.有限公司申请承认和执行米兰法院破产判决案”、2014年“波兰弗里古波尔股份有限公司申请承认和执行波兰共和国法院判决案”。分别参见最高人民法院[2014]民四他字第9号;刘建红:“申请承认和执行意大利法院破产裁决案”,载《中国法律》2003年第3期;宁波市中级人民法院(2013)浙甬民确字第1号民事裁定书。
(1)L. R. Kiestra,The Impact of the ECHR on Private International Law:An Analysis of Strasbourg and Selected National Case Law,Springer,2014,p. 202.
(2)参见瑞士《关于国际私法的联邦法》第25条、第166条第1款c项之规定。
(3)See Béligh Elbalti,Reciprocity and the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments:A Lot of Bark But not Much Bite,13 Journal of Private International Law 187-188(2017).
(1)例如,罗马尼亚保留互惠原则是基于以往罗马尼亚法院将互惠作为判决承认与执行的依据。突尼斯则是将互惠要求被作为一种“安全价值”,从而确保突尼斯在承认与执行外国判决时能够考虑国家主权。See Béligh Elbalti,Reciprocity and the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments:A Lot of Bark But not Much Bite,13 Journal of Private International Law 188-189(2017).
(2)See Béligh Elbalti,Reciprocity and the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments:A Lot of Bark But not Much Bite,13 Journal of Private International Law 192-193(2017).
(3)id.,193(2017).
(4)Supreme Court of Japan,June 7,1983. Private International Law-Enforcement of Foreign(The District of Columbia,U. S. A.)Judgment-Public Order-Reciprocity(Mutual Guarantee),27 Japanese Annual of International Law 120-121(1984).
(5)Yuri Komuro,Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments,52 Japanese Yearbook of Private International Law 610(2009).
(6)See Nozomi Tada,Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in Japan Regarding Business Activities,46 Japanese Annual of International Law 91-92(2003).
(7)T. Kono,N. Tada&M. Shin,Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments Relating to IP Rights and Unfair Competition,in J. Basedow,T. Kono&A. Metzger(eds),Intellectual Property in the Global Arena,MohrS iebeck,2010,p. 329.
(1)German Züblin International Co. Ltd v. Wuxi Walker General Engineeering Co. Ltd.,The Higher Regional Court of Berlin,Order of May 182006,File 20 Sch 13/04.
(2)例如,德国胡克拉床垫和软垫家具厂有限公司于2009年基于德国柏林高等法院的上述判决,向北京市第二中级人民法院申请承认并执行德国奥芬堡州法院的判决。对此,我国最高人民法院在《关于申请承认(及执行)德意志联邦共和国奥芬堡州法院第20460/07判决一案的请示的复函》中,不认可德国奥芬堡州法院以邮寄方式向被申请人北京富克拉家具销售有限公司送达判决书,建议北京二中院向胡克拉公司释明并告知其在完成我国法律认可的送达程序后再申请承认和执行,如果胡克拉公司仍坚持申请,则裁定驳回其申请。显然,该案中我国法院并未基于互惠关系的缺乏为由拒绝承认与执行德国判决。参见最高人民法院[2010]民四他字第81号。
(3)Hubei Gezhouba Sanlian Industrial Co.,Ltd. and Hubei Pinghu Cruise Co.,Ltd. v. Robinson Helicopter Company,Inc. 06-01798(C. D.Cal. 2009). Also see He Qisheng,Hubei Gezhouba Sanlian Indus. Co. v. Robinson Helicopter Co.,21 Asia Pacific Law Review 135-140(2013).
(4)Hubei Gezhouba Sanlian Ind.,et al v. Robinson Helicopter Company,No. 09-56629(9th Cir. 2011).
(5)尽管如此,也有学者认为单纯凭借加州地区法院执行中国判决的个案,还很难跨越中美之间的互惠障碍。参见谢新胜:“条约与互惠缺失时中国判决的域外执行——以美国法院执行中国民商事判决第一案为视角”,载《环球法律评论》2010年第4期。
(6)参见武汉市中级人民法院(2015)鄂武汉中民商外初字第00026号民事裁定书。
(7)See H. Carmon,Foreign Judgments In Israel:Recognition and Enforcement,Springer,2012,pp. 71-72.
(8)See Béligh Elbalti,Reciprocity and the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments:A Lot of Bark But not Much Bite,13 Journal of Private International Law 196(2017).
(1)See H. Peled,Voluntary Reciprocity Agreement:Enforcement of a PRC Court Judgment By an Israel Court in the Absence of a Governing Reciprocity Agreement,available at http://www. tsinghuachinalawupdate. org/single-post/2015/11/15/Voluntary-Reciprocity-Enforcement-ofa-PRC-Court-Judgment-by-an-Israeli-Court-inthe-Absence-of-a-Governing-Reciprocity-Agreement,last visited on 15 July,2018.
(2)参见丁国锋:“以色列高等法院承认并执行中国法院判决”,参见法制网:http://www. legaldaily. com. cn/international/content/2017-08/17/content_7284448. htm? node=81916,最后访问日期:2018-08-30。
(3)依据俄罗斯的法律,除了一些特定类型的案件,除非与外国存在条约义务,外国判决在俄罗斯不应得到认可。换言之,在无条约义务的情况下,俄罗斯法院可以拒绝承认与执行外国判决。See Anna Grishchenkova,Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in Russia–Recent Trends,14 Yearbook of Private International Law 439(2013-2014).
(4)莫斯科地区联邦商事法院于2006年3月2日驳回了一项针对下级法院的上诉并认为,在不存在国际条约的情况下,英国法院的判决能够基于互惠和国际礼让得到俄罗斯法院的执行。而且,俄罗斯法院在解释条约义务之要求时认为,所谓条约义务不仅包括直接处理判决承认与执行的国际条约,也包括与欧洲国家签订的诸如伙伴协定(partnership agreements)在内的国际条约。对于俄罗斯法院而言,应依据欧洲人权法院的实践,将判决的承认与执行的问题解释为《欧洲人权公约》第6条规定的诉诸司法权之内在构成部分。See Béligh Elbalti,Reciprocity and the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments:A Lot of Bark But not Much Bite,13 Journal of Private International Law 198(2017).
(5)该案涉及荷兰法院针对荷兰公司和俄罗斯公司之间的商事租约争议所作判决在俄罗斯的认可问题。初审法院认为,俄罗斯法律关于外国判决的承认与执行的依据并非仅为国际条约或联邦法,也包含互惠和国际礼让等法律原则。即便在没有条约(包括伙伴协定)的情况下,作为俄罗斯联邦宪法认可的一般原则,互惠和国际礼让可以作为俄罗斯法院赋予外国判决效力的依据。该案的裁判随后得到上诉法院和俄罗斯联邦最高商事法院所认可。(Rentpool B. V. v. Podjemnye Tekhnologii,Decision of the Commercial Court of Moscow Region NoА41-9613/09 of 5 June 2009,available at http://iurisprudentia. ru/files/case. pdf,last visited on 30 July,2018.)此外,关于莫斯科巡回上诉法院2009年6月29日的裁判及俄罗斯联邦最高法院2009年12月7日的裁判,参见C. Lightfoot,Hope on Russian Enforcement,International Financial Law Review,10 March 2010,p. 38.
(6)尽管俄罗斯和美国之间并无相关条约,莫斯科国家商业法庭于2011年11月基于互惠和国际礼让执行了美国纽约州地区法院的一项判决。See K. Krasnokutskiy,Russian Commercial Court Enforces a Judgment of a US NY District Court,available at http://navicus. ru/files/Enforcement%20of%20US%20jugdment%20in%20Russia. pdf,last visited on 30 July,2018.
(7)2011年11月8日,圣彼得堡市和列宁格勒地区商事仲裁法庭拒绝承认德国法院作出的宣告一个德国人破产的判决,原因是德国和俄罗斯之间并不存在相关条约。但是,俄罗斯联邦西北巡回商事仲裁法庭在上诉审中将之发回重审并指出,在俄罗斯与外国之间没有条约的情况下,外国破产判决也可以基于互惠被认可。在重审程序中,仲裁法庭最终认可德国的判决。Available at http://iurisprudentia. ru/files/facts. pdf,last visited on 15 July 30 2017.
(8)该案中,值得注意的是,判决债务人主张不应认可俄罗斯的判决,因为俄罗斯法律规定在无条约的情况下,不应承认与执行外国判决。以色列法院拒绝了判决债务人提出的抗辩并认为,俄罗斯的判例法明确表明,俄罗斯法律并未排除在俄罗斯与外国不存在条约的情况下,承认与执行外国判决的可能性。See Haggai Carmon,Foreign Judgments in Israel:Recognition and Enforcement,Springer,2012,p. 72.
(9)荷兰法院在实践中常常愿意承认与执行外国的判决。荷兰法律对于外国判决的承认与执行问题保持相当开放的态度。See R.van Rooij&M. V. Polak,Private International Law in Netherlands,Kluwer Law,1987,p. 73.
(10)Rentpool B. V. v. Podjemnye Tekhnologii,Decision of the Commercial Court of Moscow Region NoА41-9613/09 of 5 June 2009,available at http://iurisprudentia. ru/files/case. pdf,last visited on July 30,2018.
(1)See Béligh Elbalti,Reciprocity and the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments:A Lot of Bark But not Much Bite,13 Journal of Private International Law 191(2017).
(2)F. Ramos Romeu,Litigation under the Shadow of an Exequatur:The Spanish Recognition of U. S. Judgments,38 The International Lawyer945(2004).
(3)John F. Coyle,Rethinking Judgment Reciprocity,92 North Carolina Law Review 1109(2014).
(1)Friedrich K. Juenger,The Recognition of Money Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters,36 American Journal of Comparative Law 32(1988).
(2)Ngoc Bich Du,Cross-Border Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in Vietnam,4 Journal of Private International Law 482(2008).
(3)H. Z. Kryshtalowych&C. T. Salomon,Enforcing Foreign Arbitral Awards and Foreign Judgments in Ukraine,12 American Review of International Arbitration 425(2001).
(4)T. Bondaryev,M. Malskyy&V. Yaremko,Ukraine,in M. Moedritzer&K. C. Whittaker(eds),Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in 28Jurisdiction Worldwide 2013,Law Business Research,2012,p. 138.
(5)Cowans v. Ticinderoga Pulp&Paper Co.,219 App. Div 120.
(6)该建议草案第7条第1款规定,如果法院发现美国法院的类似判决不能在判决来源国法院得到承认和执行,则外国判决在美国不应被承认或执行。See R. A. Brand,Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments,Federal Judicial Center International Litigation Guide,2012,pp. 11-12.
(7)See John F. Coyle,Rethinking Judgment Reciprocity,92 North Carolina Law Review 1109(2014).
(8)See Béligh Elbalti,Reciprocity and the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments:A Lot of Bark But not Much Bite,13 Journal of Private International Law 218(2017).
(9)截至2017年2月,我国与外国签订的包含民商事方面内容的司法协助条约情况如下:民刑事司法协助条约19项(全部生效)、民商事司法协助条约20项(17项生效)。而且,其中部分司法协助条约的内容并不包括判决的承认与执行问题的规定。外交部网站:http://www. fmprc. gov. cn/web/ziliao_674904/tytj_674911/wgdwdjdsfhzty_674917/t1215630. shtml,最后访问日期:2018-08-30。
(10)正因如此,一些日本学者一般倾向于保留互惠要求,以便拒绝认可中国判决。Satoshi Watanabe,A Study of a Series of Cases Caused Non-Recognition of a Judicial Judgment between Japan and Mainland China–A Cross-border Garnishment Order of the Japanese Court Issued to a Chinese Company as a Third-Party Debtor,57 Japanese Yearbook of Private International Law 302(2014).
(1)Samuel P. Baumgartner,Understanding the Obstacles to the Recognition and Enforcement of U. S. Judgments Abroad,44 New York Journal of International Law and Policy 974(2013).
(2)例如,尽管互惠受到德国学者的诸多批评,但是德国政府认为目前取消互惠的实践并不成熟,而决定仍对之予以保留。See Dieter Martiny,Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Money Judgments in the Federal Republic of Germany,35 American Journal of Comparative Law749(1987).
(1)See Béligh Elbalti,Reciprocity and the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments:A Lot of Bark But not Much Bite,13 Journal of Private International Law 218(2017).