Education, Science, Technology, Innovation and Life
Open Access
Sign In

Empirical Analysis on the Validity of Unilateral Court Selection Agreements

Download as PDF

DOI: 10.23977/law.2025.040508 | Downloads: 0 | Views: 24

Author(s)

Zhao Xiaoyang 1

Affiliation(s)

1 Faculty of Law, Guilin University of Electronic Technology, No.1 Jinji Road, Guilin, China

Corresponding Author

Zhao Xiaoyang

ABSTRACT

The agreement stipulating that "disputes shall be subject to the jurisdiction of the people's court designated by XX" represents the outcome of party autonomy, with "the people's court designated by XX" constituting one method for parties to select a court of jurisdiction. Through this agreement, the parties grant XX the right to designate the People's Court. This arrangement does not violate the provisions of the Civil Procedure Law concerning statutory and exclusive jurisdiction, nor does it restrict or exclude the counterparty's right to select a court of jurisdiction. The following primary issues exist in determining the validity of unilateral court selection agreements in China: First, interpretations of "the people's court designated by XX" are overly confined to literal meanings. Second, courts sometimes issue surprise rulings when adjudicating the validity of unilateral court-selection agreements.

KEYWORDS

Unilateral Choice of Court; Validity Determination of Agreements; Surprise Rulings; Duty to Explain

CITE THIS PAPER

Zhao Xiaoyang. Empirical Analysis on the Validity of Unilateral Court Selection Agreements. Science of Law Journal (2025) Vol. 4: 56-60. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/DOI: 10.23977/law.2025.040508.

REFERENCES

[1] Wang Liming: Research on Contract Law, Volume I (3rd Edition), China Renmin University Press, 2015, p. 465.
[2] Supreme People's Court Gazette No. 12, 2007.
[3] Long Zongzhi: "Research on Preventing Surprise Judgments in Criminal Proceedings," in Political and Legal Forum, No. 4, 2022, p. 58.
[4] Yang Yanyan: "On Preventing Surprise Judgments in Civil Litigation: Focusing on the Application of Modern Trial Theory," in China Juris, No. 4, 2016, p. 269.
[5] Yang Yihong: "Litigious Surprise: Preliminary Exploration of an Issue," in Hebei Law Review, No. 12, 2011, p.154.
[6] Wang Hui: "On Judges' Duty to Explain Changes to Claims," in Hebei Law Review, No. 11, 2015, p. 156.

All published work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Copyright © 2016 - 2031 Clausius Scientific Press Inc. All Rights Reserved.