| 關 鍵 詞： |
涉外離婚案件；國際離婚管轄權；家事事件法；專屬管轄權；不便利法庭原則 |
| 中文摘要： |
我國涉外民事法律適用法在二○一一年五月二十六日修正施行。其中，就涉外離婚案件之修法，新法不再僅適用夫之本國法，基於兩性平權原則與彈性選法政策，明文在「國籍」、「住所」與「關係最切」三個順位之選法階段中，規定適用法律之順序。觀察修法後我國法院有關涉外離婚之判決，發現因多數夫妻國籍不同，「住所」被適用之機會遠大於國籍，然因新舊法對於國際裁判管轄權均未有規定，其理論仍在發展中，實務上往往不討論管轄權，且錯認住所之定義等情形，導致連繫因素之決定與法律適用之正確性均成問題。復因近來制訂施行之家事事件法中有國際裁判管轄權之規定，其規定是否妥適，亦有加以檢視之必要。
|
| 英文關鍵詞： |
international divorce cases；international divorce jurisdiction；the Law of Domestic Proceedings；exclusive jurisdiction；Doctrine of Forum Non Conveniens |
| 英文摘要： |
The Conflict of Laws of ROC was amended and applied on May 26, 2011. The policies behind the revision regarding domestic relations between spouses are based on the Doctrine of Gender Equality, and Flexibility of Choice of Rules. Instead of applying the law of country where the nationality of husband belongs, the new rule makes nationality, domicile and the most significant relationship all as the connecting factors, and governs orderly in international divorce cases. Reviewing current divorce judgments of Taiwan after the revision, it is found that the rule of domicile prevailed among other factors since most of the couples in litigation were from different countries, and the courts assumed their exclusive jurisdiction on the theory of the sole and common domicile of couples as well without mentioning any issue of jurisdictions. Section 53 of the Law of Domestic Proceedings is the new and first statute regarding the international divorce jurisdiction in Taiwan. Therefore, it is time to view this new provision in detail, including but not limited, that if it is well defined, how to explain it, and if the Doctrine of Forum Non Conveniens is hiding inside.
|
| 目 次： |
壹、前言
貳、典型涉外離婚案例分析
一、典型案例之態樣
（一）案例事實
（二）程序方面
（三）法院判決
二、案例之共同與差異點分析
三、小結
參、涉外離婚案件與國際裁判管轄權
一、國際裁判管轄權之理論
（一）逆推知說
（二）修正類推說
（三）利益衡量說（利益衡量後的修正類推適用說）
（一）夫妻之住所地是否必須同一
（二）是否屬於專屬管轄
肆、涉外離婚案件與家事事件法之管轄權
一、離婚國內管轄權
（一）非夫妻之共同住所始有管轄權
（二）非專屬管轄
二、離婚國際裁判管轄權
三、不便利法庭原則？
伍、代結論－案例檢視
一、舊民事訴訟法時期與國際裁判管轄權
二、家事事件法施行後與國際裁判管轄權
|
| 相關法條： |
 |
| 相關判解： |
|
| 相關函釋： |
|
| 相關論著： |
|