دادگاه صالح برای رسیدگی به دعاوی ناشی از قراردادهای الکترونیکی

نوع مقاله: پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دکتری حقوق تجارت بین الملل، استادیار دانشکده‌ی حقوق و علوم سیاسی دانشگاه مازندران

2 دکتری حقوق خصوصی، استادیار دانشکده‌ی حقوق و علوم سیاسی دانشگاه مازندران

3 داتنشجوی دکتری حقوق خصوصی، دانشکده‌ی حقوق و علوم سیاسی دانشگاه مازندران

چکیده

ماهیت منحصر به فرد اینترنت و قراردادهای انعقاد یافته در فضای مجازی، در بسیاری از اصول و مفاهیم سنتی صلاحیت محاکم، تأثیراتی شگرف داشته است. یکی از اقسام این قراردادها، قراردادهای الکترونیکی تاجر با مصرف‌کننده (B2C) است؛ که در آن‌ها اصولاً، مصرف‌کننده طرف ضعیف‌تر قرارداد محسوب می‌شود؛ از این رو نیازمند یک مکانیزم حمایتی است. یکی از جنبه‌های حمایتی از مصرف‌کننده، تعیین دادگاه صالح و توجه به «آیین دادرسی ویژه در دعاوی قراردادهای الکترونیکی» است. در مقام تعیین چنین دادگاهی، ارائه‌ی تحلیل مبتنی بر نظریه‌ی «جهت‌دهی فعالیت»، نتیجه‌ی نهایی است که به عنوان راهکار به قانون‌گذار ایران پیشنهاد می‌شود.

کلیدواژه‌ها


1- کاویار، حسین، تعیین قانون حاکم در قراردادهای تجاری الکترونیکی، پایان‌نامه‌ی دوره‌ی کارشناسی ارشد حقوق خصوصی، دانشکده‌ی حقوق و علوم سیاسی دانشگاه مازندران، 1389.

I) Books and Articles

2- Debussere, F., International Jurisdiction over E-consumer Contracts in the European Union: Quid Novi Sub Sole? , International Journal of Law and Information Technology, Vol. 10, No. 3, 2002.

3- Ferretti, Federico, The Law and Consumer Credit Information in the European Community The Regulation of Credit Information Systems, Routledge-Cavendish, New York, First Edition, 2008.

4- Financial Services Authority, Discussion Paper - The FSA’s Approach To Regulation Of The Market Infrastructure, (January 2000), online: FSA, <http://www.fsa.gov.uk/pubs/discussion/d02.pdf>

5- Firat, A.F. and Dholakia, N., Theoretical and philosophical implications of postmodern debates: some challenges to modern marketing, Marketing Theory, June, Vol. 6, No. 2, 2006.

6- Foss, M., & Bygrave A. L., International Consumer Purchases through the Internet: Jurisdictional Issues pursuant to European Law, Electronic Commerce Legal Issues Platform (Eclip), ESPRIT Project 27028.

7- Geist, Michael, Internet Jurisdiction: The Shifting Adjudicatory Approach, Isuma: Canadian Journal of Policy Research, Vol.3, No. 1, 2002.

8- Mitrani, A., Regulating E-commerce, E-contracts and the Controversy of Multiple Jurisdiction, Int.T.L.R, Vol. 7, No. 2, 2001.

9- Motion, P., The Brussels I and E-Commerce - A Premature Solution to a Fictional Problem, Computer and Telecommunications Law Review, Vol. 7, No. 8, 2001.

10- National Policy 47-210: Trading in Securities Using the Internet and Other Electronic Means, (Notice NIN#98/72), online: British Columbia Securities Commission, <http://www.bcsc.bc.ca/Policy/Nin98-72.pdf>

11- Neumueller, C., Are We There Yet? An Analysis of Canadian and European Adjudicatory Jurisdiction Principles in the Context of Electronic Commerce Consumer Protection and Policy Issues, University of Ottawa Law & Technology Journal, Vol. 3, No. 2, 2006.

12- Pearson Education Limited, Longman Business English Dictionary, England, Longman Pub, 2000.

13- Proposal for a Council Regulation (EC) on Jurisdiction and the Recognition and Enforcement of Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters (presented by the Commission), COM (1999) 348 final 99/0154 (CNS).

14- Raut, Bimal, Determining the Judicial Jurisdiction in the Transnational Cyberspace, Professional Doctorate Thesis, School of Law at Queensland University of Technology, 2004.

15- Report of the American Bar Association (ABA) Jurisdiction in Cyberspace Project Empanelled in 1998 under the title, “Transnational Issues in Cyberspace: A Project on the Law relating to Jurisdiction”.

16- Securities Activity on the Internet, International Organisation of Securities Commissions (IOSCO) - Technical Committee (September 1998), online: <http://www.iosco.org/download/pdf/1998-internet _ security.pdf>

17- Spanogle, J.A. et al., Consumer Law: Cases and Materials, 2nd Ed, West Group Pub, 1991.

18- St Oren, J., International Jurisdiction over Consumer Contracts in e-Europe, The International and Comparative Law Quarterly, Vol. 52, No. 3, 2003.

19- Statt, David A., Concise Dictionary of Business Management, 2nd ed., London, Taylor & Francis Pub, 1999.

20- Stone, P., Internet Consumer Contracts and European Private International Law, Information & Communication Technology Law, Vol. 6, No. 8, 2000.

21- Von Mehren, T., A., Adjudicatory Jurisdiction: General Theories Compared and Evaluated, Boston University Law Review 279, Vol. 63, No. 2, 1983.

22- Whaley, D.J., Problems and Materials on Consumer Law, 4nd Ed, Aspen Publishers, 2006.

23- Zhao., Yun, Dispute Resolution in Electronic Commerce, Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, Leiden, 2005.

 

II) Acts, Treaties and other Instruments

24- 80/934/EEC, Convention on the Law Applicable to Contractual Obligations, (1980) L 2661.

25- Amended proposal for a Council Regulation on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters (presented by the Commission pursuant to Article 250 (2) of the EC-Treaty), [2001] OJ E 62, p. 243-75.

26- Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 of 22 December 2000 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters, 2001 OJ L 12.

27- Council Regulation on Jurisdiction and the Recognition and Enforcement of Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matter (“Brussels Regulation”), see Council Regulation (EC) No. 44/2001, 22 December 2000, Official Journal L 012, 16.01.2001, p.1, available at: http://europa.eu.int/ eur-lex/ pri/en/oj/dat/2001/ l_012/l_ 01220010116 en 00010023. pdf.

28- European Parliament, Report on the Proposal for a Council Regulation on Jurisdiction and the Recognition and Enforcement of Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters (COM (1999) 348. C5-0169/1999. 1999/0154(CNS)), Committee on Legal Affairs and the Internal Market.

29- Hague Conference on Private International Law; Preliminary Draft Convention on Jurisdiction and Foreign Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters, adopted by the Special Commission on 30 October 1999, Available at: < http://cryptome.org/hague-draft.htm#draft>

30- Joint Council and Commission Statement on Articles 15 and 73 of 14 Dec. 2000, available at http://register.consilium.eu.int/pdf/en/00/st14/14139en0.pdf, Annex II, p. 5 of the statement. Last visited on 1 Sept. 2005.

31- OECD Guidelines for Consumer Protection in the Context of Electronic Commerce (9 Dec 1999). Available at: <http://www.oecd.org/document/18/0,3343,en_2649_34267_44132242_1_1_1_1,00.html>

32- Opinion of AG Jacobs in Case C-464/01, delivered on 16 Sept. 2004, para. 51. See also the decision of the Court, paras. 51-2.

33- Opinion of the Economic and Social Committee on the Proposal for a Council Regulation (EC) on jurisdiction and recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters , 2000 OJ C 117, 06-11.

34- U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, Interpretation: Re: Use of Internet Web Sites To Offer Securities, Solicit Securities Transactions, or Advertise Investment Services Offshore, (Release Nos. 33-7516, 34-39779, IA-1710, IC-23071), March 23, 1998, Available at: <http://www.sec.gov/rules/interp/33-7516.htm>

 

III) Table of Cases

35- American Information Corporation v. American Infometrics, Inc., 139 F.Supp.2d 696 (D Md 2001).

36- Case 221/84 Berghoefer v. ASA, [1985] CR 2699.

37- Case 71/83 Tilly Russ v. Haven, [1984] ECR 2517

38- Case C-464/01, Johann Gruber v. Bay Wa AG, delivered on 20 Jan. 2005.

39- Case C-89/91, Shearson Lehmann Hutton Inc v. TVB Treuhandgesellschaft für Vermögensverwaltung und Beteiligung mbH, [1993] ECR I-139.

40- ECJ 14 December 1976 – 25/76 – Segoura v Bonakdarian [1976] ECR 1851.

41- Shearson Lehmann Hutton decision, para. 13; Case C-269/95, Francesco Benincasa v. Dentalkit Srl [1997] ECR, p. I-3767.

42- The European Legal Forum-Case Law, Judgment No. 000026, p.1, Available at: <www.simons-law.com/caselaw/pdf/26.pdf>

 

IV) Websites

43- <www.curia.eu.int/jurisp/cgibin/form.pl?lang=fr>

44- <www.europa.eu.int/comm/justice_home/unit/civil/justciv_fr.pdf>