Bernard AUDIT - Professor (université Paris 2 Panthéon-Assas)
Etienne PATAUT - Professor (université Paris I)
Laurence USUNIER - Professor (université Paris-Nord - Villetaneuse)
Marie-Laure NIBOYET - Professor (université Paris X - Nanterre)
Philippe THERY - Professor (université Paris 2 Panthéon-Assas)
French private international law doctrine classicaly defines judicial jurisdiction as the branch of law that deals with describing the hypothesis under which the State makes its courts available to claimants in international matters. This presentation, though, faces two contradicting evolutions in modern-day litigation of international business matters. First, it does give no account of the increasing internationalization of this branch of law, where numerous international conventions and European regulations now regulates judicial jurisdiction between judges of different countries as they would with venue between judges of the same State. Second, this presentation ignores the development of international courts and arbitral tribunals even though these tribunals compete with or replace national courts in international business disputes.
The reason for this double exclusion may actually be found in an analytical bias inherited from a century-old description of private international law as a conflict of State regulations, a bias that neither modern theory nor law itself confirms in any way. More simply described according to the problem it resolves, judicial jurisdiction may be defined as the branch of law that deals with organizing the international competition of judges. Under this functional definition, it is possible to broaden its scope and to describe the organization of international justice for business matters, both public and private, both State and International. Also, then encompassing rules of procedure, it becomes possible to offer new solutions to take into account foreign jurisdiction for a better international cooperation.