The Lis pendens Doctrine in Private International Law in Iran with a Comparative Study in the Roman-German Legal System

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

1 PhD Student in Private Law, Faculty of Law and Political Science, University of Mazandaran, Babolsar, Iran.

2 Assistant Prof. Faculty of Law and Political Science at University of Mazandaran, Babolsar, Iran.

3 Assistant Professor, Department of Private Law, Faculty of Law, Qaemshahr Branch, Islamic Azad University, Qaemshahr, Iran.

Abstract

The Lis Pendens doctrine has been recognized as a means of preventing parallel proceedings in private international law in most Roman-German countries. In Iranian law, this doctrine was accepted as one of the objections and obstacles to proceedings in domestic lawsuits according to paragraph 2 of Article 84 of the Code of Civil Procedure. However, in an international lawsuit explicitly under Article 971 of the Civil Code, the same lawsuit in a foreign court does not remove the jurisdiction of the Iranian court. This approach, which is based on the doctrine of national sovereignty and disregard for the principle of Comity for the action of the foreign court, has provoked criticism from some legal scholars. However, recognizing this doctrine in the private international law of countries can increase legal certainty, reduce trade and litigation costs, provide more confidence in international investment, and ultimately administer justice. Therefore, the aim of this study is to examine the approach of Roman-German legal systems, including the laws of France, Switzerland, and Italy. In this article, the possibility, conditions, and effects of accepting the Lis Pendens doctrine in private international law of Iran is explored, that will take a step towards the legal development of the country. These studies showed that in Iranian law, implementing legal and economic necessities require Lis pendens doctrine in international litigation under certain conditions.  An Iranian court is allowed to take a step towards the legal development of the country by implementing Lis Pendens doctorine. The Iranian court is allowed to close the case in favor of the jurisdiction of the foreign court until the final verdict is clarified.

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

  1. Ansari, A. & Kabri, M. M. (2019). Lis pendens in private international lawsuits with a view to Iranian law, Journal of Private Law, 2)16(, 301 – 321. (In Persian)
  2. Arfa Nia, B. (2004). Private International Law, Tehran: (In Persian)
  3. Baker & McKenzie. (2010). The Baker & McKenzie International Arbitration Yearbook 2009. Russia, Волтерс Клувер.
  4. Beheshti, M. J. & Mardani, N. (2010). Civil Procedure, Tehran: Mizan (In Persian)
  5. Bickel, A. M. (1949). Doctrine of Forum Non- Conveniens as Applied in the Federal Courts in Matters of Admiralty. Cornell law Review, vol 35 (2), 12-47.
  6. Braunreuther, J. G. (1978). Forum Non- Conveniens Invoked Sua Sponte by a Court of Limited Jurisdiction. St. John’s Law Review, Vol 52 (4), 637- 642.
  7. Calamita, N. J. (2006). Rethinking Comity: Towards a Coherent Treatment of International Parallel Proceedings. U. Pa. J. Int'l Econ. L., Vol 27(3), 601-680.
  8. Castel, J. G. (1957). Jurisdiction and Money Judgments Rendered Abroad. Anglo-American and French Practice Compared. McGill LJ, Vol. 4, 152- 203.
  9. Cuniberti, G. (2007). Article 15 of the Civil Code is No Longer a Bar to the Recognition of Foreign Judgments in France. Available at: https://conflictoflaws.net. Last visited 2021/7/17.
  10. Fawcett, J. J. (1995). Declining Jurisdiction in Private International Law: Reports to the XIVth Congress of the International Academy of Comparative Law, Athens, August 1994 (Vol. 14). Oxford University Press.
  11. Ghamami, M. & Mohseni, H. (2017). Transnational Civil Procedure, Tehran: Publication of a joint stock company. (In Persian)
  12. Giardina, A. (1996). Italy: law Reforming the Italian System of Private international law. International Legal Materials, Vol 35(3), 760-782.
  13. Hayati, A. (2015). Civil Procedure, Tehran: Mizan (In Persian)
  14. Izanlou, M., Jabarizadeh, R. (2018). Reciprocity as a condition for the execution of foreign judgments: A study in the private international law of Iran and the United States, Journal of Legal Research, No. 88, 85-108. (In Persian)
  15. Janecková, P. (2017). Lis Pendens as the Solution of Jurisdictional Conflicts. Humanities and Social Sciences Review. 07 (01), 357-362.
  16. Janecková, P. (2017). Lis Pendens before national and arbitration courts. International Journal of Multidisciplinary Thought. 06 (01), 291-299.
  17. Li, S. (2020). Lis Pendens or Forum Non-Conveniens: Balance between Stability and Flexibility. NYUJ Int'l L. & Pol., Vol 52, 967- 974.
  18. Matin Daftari, A. (1999). Civil Procedure, Tehran: Mizan (In Persian)
  19. Maghsoudi, R. (2012). Obstacles to the exercise of jurisdiction in private international law, Journal of Private Law, 1)9(, 97 – 126. (In Persian)
  20. Maghsoudi, R. (2014). Parallel litigation in international litigation, Comparative Law Studies, 2)5 (, 581 – 602. (In Persian)
  21. McLachlan, C. (2009). Lis pendens in international litigation. Leiden/Boston, Martinus Nijhoff Publishers.
  22. Oetiker, C. (2014). The Principle of Lis Pendens in International Arbitration: The Swiss Decision in Fomento v. Colon. Arbitration International, vol 18(2), 137-145.
  23. Pailli, G. (2013). Lis Alibi Pendens within Europe: Is There a Way Out of the ‘First in Time’ Rule. 1-9. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=227657.
  24. Poor N, M. (2004). Identify and enforce foreign court rulings in Iran, Journal of the Bar Association, Number 186-187, 78-97. (In Persian)
  25. Reed, A. (2000). To Be or Not to Be: The Forum Non- Conveniens Performance Acted Out on Anglo-American Courtroom Stages. Ga. J. Int'l & Comp. L., Vol 29, 31-126.
  26. Regan, J. C. (1981). The Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in France under the Nouveau Code de Procédure Civile. BC Int'l & Comp. L. Rev., Vol 4, 149-202.
  27. Russo, A., & Rains, R. E. (1999). The Reform of the Italian System of Private International Law with Particular Regard to Domestic Relations Issues. NCJ Int'l L. & Com. Reg., Vol 25(2), 271-334.
  28. Safaei, H. (2014). Private International Law, Tehran: Mizan (In Persian)
  29. Saljuqi, M. (2020). Private International Law, Tehran: Mizan (In Persian)
  30. Shams, A. (2015), Civil Procedure, Tehran: Derak (In Persian)
  31. Shariat Bagheri, M. J. (2017). Private International Law, Tehran: Mizan (In Persian)
  32. Walker, J. (2001). Parallel Proceedings Converging Views: The Westec Appeal. Canadian Yearbook of International Law/Annuaire canadien de droit international, Vol 38, 155-188.
  33. Zhenjie, H. (2001). Forum Non-Conveniens: An Unjustified Doctrine. Netherlands International Law Review, 48 (2), 143-169.

 

Files

History

  • Receive Date: 21 June 2022
  • Revise Date: 19 July 2022
  • Accept Date: 23 July 2022

Share

How to cite

Statistics