远离司法的合同:消费者合同中法院选择条款的执行

M. Pavlović
{"title":"远离司法的合同:消费者合同中法院选择条款的执行","authors":"M. Pavlović","doi":"10.7202/1040051AR","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Forum-selection agreements in consumer contracts nominate by default the business’s home jurisdiction to resolve disputes and thus directly impact a consumer’s ability not only to access courts, but also to obtain access to substantive justice. It has been argued that courts should consider enforcing jurisdiction clauses in consumer contracts with “greater scrutiny” because of their inherent power imbalance. To examine how the courts approach forum-selection clauses in consumer contracts, this article analyzed all reported consumer cases involving forum-selection agreements in Canadian common law jurisdictions between 1995 and 2016. The analysis of these cases shows that the courts have failed to exercise the greater scrutiny that was called for. In light of the analysis of the surveyed cases, this article argues that the rules for enforcing forum-selection clauses in consumer contracts ought to be recalibrated to reflect the power dynamics of consumer relationships, the ubiquity of standard-form contracts, and their effect on consumers’ ability to obtain redress. This article proposes two suggestions for reform: legislative intervention to invalidate forum-selection clauses in consumer agreements, and reframing and recalibrating the common law strong-cause test for the enforcement of forum-selection clauses in consumer transactions.","PeriodicalId":405630,"journal":{"name":"LSN: Contract Litigation","volume":"235 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Contracting Out of Access to Justice: Enforcement of Forum Selection Clauses in Consumer Contracts\",\"authors\":\"M. Pavlović\",\"doi\":\"10.7202/1040051AR\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Forum-selection agreements in consumer contracts nominate by default the business’s home jurisdiction to resolve disputes and thus directly impact a consumer’s ability not only to access courts, but also to obtain access to substantive justice. It has been argued that courts should consider enforcing jurisdiction clauses in consumer contracts with “greater scrutiny” because of their inherent power imbalance. To examine how the courts approach forum-selection clauses in consumer contracts, this article analyzed all reported consumer cases involving forum-selection agreements in Canadian common law jurisdictions between 1995 and 2016. The analysis of these cases shows that the courts have failed to exercise the greater scrutiny that was called for. In light of the analysis of the surveyed cases, this article argues that the rules for enforcing forum-selection clauses in consumer contracts ought to be recalibrated to reflect the power dynamics of consumer relationships, the ubiquity of standard-form contracts, and their effect on consumers’ ability to obtain redress. This article proposes two suggestions for reform: legislative intervention to invalidate forum-selection clauses in consumer agreements, and reframing and recalibrating the common law strong-cause test for the enforcement of forum-selection clauses in consumer transactions.\",\"PeriodicalId\":405630,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"LSN: Contract Litigation\",\"volume\":\"235 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2016-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"LSN: Contract Litigation\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.7202/1040051AR\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"LSN: Contract Litigation","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.7202/1040051AR","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

摘要

消费者合同中的法院选择协议默认指定企业的本国司法管辖区来解决纠纷,从而直接影响消费者诉诸法院的能力,也直接影响消费者诉诸实质司法的能力。有人认为,法院应该考虑以“更严格的审查”来执行消费者合同中的管辖权条款,因为它们固有的权力不平衡。为了研究法院如何处理消费者合同中的法院选择条款,本文分析了1995年至2016年加拿大普通法管辖区内所有涉及法院选择协议的消费者案件。对这些案件的分析表明,法院未能行使所要求的更严格的审查。根据对调查案例的分析,本文认为消费者合同中执行形式选择条款的规则应该重新调整,以反映消费者关系的权力动态、标准形式合同的普遍存在以及它们对消费者获得补救能力的影响。本文提出了两方面的改革建议:立法干预消费者协议中法院选择条款的无效化;重构和重新调整普通法中法院选择条款执行的强因检验。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Contracting Out of Access to Justice: Enforcement of Forum Selection Clauses in Consumer Contracts
Forum-selection agreements in consumer contracts nominate by default the business’s home jurisdiction to resolve disputes and thus directly impact a consumer’s ability not only to access courts, but also to obtain access to substantive justice. It has been argued that courts should consider enforcing jurisdiction clauses in consumer contracts with “greater scrutiny” because of their inherent power imbalance. To examine how the courts approach forum-selection clauses in consumer contracts, this article analyzed all reported consumer cases involving forum-selection agreements in Canadian common law jurisdictions between 1995 and 2016. The analysis of these cases shows that the courts have failed to exercise the greater scrutiny that was called for. In light of the analysis of the surveyed cases, this article argues that the rules for enforcing forum-selection clauses in consumer contracts ought to be recalibrated to reflect the power dynamics of consumer relationships, the ubiquity of standard-form contracts, and their effect on consumers’ ability to obtain redress. This article proposes two suggestions for reform: legislative intervention to invalidate forum-selection clauses in consumer agreements, and reframing and recalibrating the common law strong-cause test for the enforcement of forum-selection clauses in consumer transactions.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信