Abstract
A historical tracing suggested that the concept of comity has its root from public international law. In modern days, it forms a rationale underpinning the doctrine of forum non conveniens in private international law. However, Australia has rejected a popular formulation of the ‘more appropriate forum’ test used in England and other common law jurisdictions and instead decided to adopt a more stringent test of ‘clearly inappropriate forum’. To what extent is this version of the forum non conveniens doctrine in compatible with the comity concept? It is argued that the courts in Australia largely pay lip service to the comity concept in their consideration.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
- 1.
Paul (2008), p. 20.
- 2.
Mann (1986), p. 134.
- 3.
Collins et al (2006), para 1–009.
- 4.
Fawcett and Carruthers (2008), p. 5.
- 5.
Schultz and Mitchenson (2019), p. 383.
- 6.
Kämmerer (2020).
- 7.
Schultz and Mitchenson (2019), pp. 389–390.
- 8.
Ibid., 390.
- 9.
Ibid., 395.
- 10.
Ibid., 396.
- 11.
Ibid., 398–399.
- 12.
Lorenzen (1918–1919), pp. 376 and 378.
- 13.
Ibid., 376.
- 14.
Llewelyn Davies (1937), pp. 65–66 (emphasis added).
- 15.
Mills (2009), p. 47.
- 16.
Ibid.
- 17.
Llewelyn Davies (1937), p. 69.
- 18.
Ibid., 69–70.
- 19.
Briggs (2012), p. 80.
- 20.
Calamita (2006), p. 606.
- 21.
Ibid., 629.
- 22.
Ibid., 624 referring to Hilton et al. v Guyot et al. 159 U.S. 113 (1895).
- 23.
159 U.S. 113, at 143.
- 24.
Ibid., 631.
- 25.
[1984] 1 Lloyd’s Rep. 339.
- 26.
Ibid., 344.
- 27.
Ibid.
- 28.
Mann (1986), p. 135.
- 29.
Dyzenhaus (2019), p. 140.
- 30.
Ibid.
- 31.
[1987] 1 A.C. 460.
- 32.
Ibid., 476.
- 33.
Ibid., 477.
- 34.
[1990] HCA 55; (1990) 171 CLR 538.
- 35.
Ibid., 558.
- 36.
Ibid.
- 37.
CSR Limited v Cigna Insurance Australia Limited and others; CSR America Inc v Cigna Insurance Australia Limited and Others [1997] HCA 33; (1997) 189 CLR 345.
- 38.
[2002] HCA 10; (2002) CLR 491, [94].
- 39.
Keyes (2004), p. 52.
- 40.
[1996] HCA 51; (1996) 185 CLR 571.
- 41.
Ibid., 581–582.
- 42.
Ibid., 592.
- 43.
(1990) 171 CLR 538, at 558.
- 44.
Keyes (2004), p52.
- 45.
[2002] HCA 10; (2002) 210 CLR 491.
- 46.
Ibid., [82].
- 47.
Schultz and Mitchenson (2016), p. 369.
- 48.
See ibid.
- 49.
[2012] NSWSC 44; (2012) 262 FLR 119.
- 50.
Ibid., [30].
- 51.
Ibid., [32].
- 52.
Ibid., [39].
- 53.
Ibid., [48].
- 54.
Ibid., [50].
- 55.
Ibid., [51].
- 56.
Ibid., [53].
- 57.
Ibid., [55].
- 58.
Ibid., [59].
- 59.
Ibid., [68].
- 60.
Ibid., [73].
- 61.
Ibid., [86].
- 62.
Ibid., [87].
- 63.
Ibid., [90].
- 64.
Ibid., [111].
- 65.
Ibid., [113].
- 66.
Ibid., [115].
- 67.
Ibid., [117].
- 68.
Ibid., [130].
- 69.
Ibid., [134].
- 70.
Ibid., [138].
- 71.
Ibid., [146].
- 72.
Ibid., [147].
- 73.
Ibid., [172].
- 74.
Ibid., [218].
- 75.
Ibid., [219].
- 76.
Ibid., [222].
- 77.
[2014] FCAFC 90; (2014) 224 FCR 384.
- 78.
CMA CGM SA v Ship “Chou Shan” [2014] FCA 74, [1].
- 79.
Ibid., [2].
- 80.
Ibid., [4].
- 81.
Ibid., [2].
- 82.
Ibid., [3].
- 83.
Ibid., [5].
- 84.
Ibid., [157].
- 85.
Ibid., [158].
- 86.
Ibid., [147].
- 87.
Ibid., [158].
Article 56(1) of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea 1982 provides:
-
1.
In the exclusive economic zone, the coastal State has:
-
(a)
sovereign rights for the purpose of exploring and exploiting, conserving, and managing natural resources, whether living or non-living, of the waters superjacent to the seabed and of the seabed and its subsoil, and with regard to other activities for the economic exploitation and exploration of the zone, such as the production of energy from the water, currents and winds;
-
(b)
jurisdiction as provided for in the relevant provisions of this Convention with regard to:
-
(i)
the establishment and use of artificial islands, installation and structures;
-
(ii)
marine scientific research;
-
(iii)
the protection and preservation of the marine environment;
-
(i)
-
(c)
other rights and duties provided for in this Convention.
-
(a)
-
1.
- 88.
Ibid., [158].
- 89.
(2014) 224 FCR 384, [42].
- 90.
Ibid., [46].
- 91.
Ibid., [62].
- 92.
Ibid., [58].
- 93.
[2007] NSWSC 882; (2007) 213 FLR 331.
- 94.
Ibid., [1].
- 95.
Ibid., [98].
- 96.
Ibid., [5] and [79].
- 97.
Ibid., [95].
- 98.
Ibid., [108].
- 99.
Ibid., [107].
- 100.
Ibid., [82] and [107].
- 101.
Ibid., [111].
- 102.
Ibid., [116].
- 103.
Ibid., [119]–[121].
- 104.
Ibid., [122].
- 105.
Ibid., [125].
- 106.
Garsec v His Majesty The Sultan of Brunei [2008] NSWCA 211, [130].
- 107.
Ibid., [142].
References
Briggs A (2012) The principle of comity in private international law. Receuil Cours: Collect Courses Hague Acad Int Law 354:65–182
Calamita NJ (2006) Rethinking comity: towards a coherent treatment of international parallel proceedings. Univ Pa J Int Econ Law 27:601–680
Collins L et al (2006) Dicey, Morris & Collins the conflict of laws, vol 1. Sweet & Maxwell, London
Dyzenhaus D (2019) Sovereignty: A contribution to the theory of public and international law. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Fawcett J, Carruthers JM (2008) Cheshire. Oxford University Press, Oxford, North & Fawcett Private International Law
Kämmerer JA (2020) Comity. In: Max planck encyclopedia of public international law.
Keyes M (2004) Jurisdiction in international family litigation: a critical analysis. Univ N S W Law J 27:42–65
Llewelyn Davies DJ (1937) The influence of Huber’s De conflictu legum on english private international law. Br Yearb Int Law 18:49–78
Lorenzen EG (1918–1919) Huber’s De Conflictu Legum. Ill Law Rev 13:375–418
Mann FA (1986) foreign affairs in english courts. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Mills A (2009) The confluence of public and private international law: justice, pluralism and subsidiarity in the international constitutional ordering of private law. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Paul JR (2008) The transformation of international comity. Law Contemp Probl 71:19–38
Schultz T, Mitchenson J (2016) Navigating sovereignty and transnational commercial law: the use of comity by Australian courts. J PrivE Int Law 26:311–340
Schultz and Mitchenson J, (2019) The history of comity. Jus Gentium: J Int Leg Hist 4:383–418
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2022 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Sooksripaisarnkit, P. (2022). Forum Non Conveniens in Australia—How Much Weight Should Be Given to Comity?. In: Sooksripaisarnkit, P., Prasad, D. (eds) Blurry Boundaries of Public and Private International Law. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-16-8480-7_4
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-16-8480-7_4
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore
Print ISBN: 978-981-16-8479-1
Online ISBN: 978-981-16-8480-7
eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)