Article by Martin Davies
This Article will argue that the time is ripe for the United States Supreme Court to review and restate the law governing forum non conveniens dismissal. There is a need to review both the factors to be considered in a forum non conveniens case and the test to be applied in determining whether to grant dismissal. The factors are anachronistic; the test is imprecise and incoherent.
This Article will also show that most of the forum non conveniens factors should be given very different weight today than when they were first enunciated in 1947. Advances in communications technology and changes in the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and Federal Rules of Evidence have produced the result that some of the factors are largely redundant and others point in a very different direction than they did in 1947.
There are many possible reforms that would improve the present state of the law, some more far-reaching than others. This Article briefly considers the forum non conveniens standard suggested in the Draft Hague Convention on Jurisdiction and Foreign Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters, finding support there for the arguments made in this Article that the present U.S. test is inappropriate for use in international cases. However, because it is very unlikely that the United States will ever adopt the Draft Hague Convention, Part VI suggests, by way of conclusion, several alternative reforms for domestic implementation.
About the Author
Martin Davies. Admiralty Law Institute Professor of Maritime Law and Co-Director, Maritime Law Center, Tulane Law School.
Citation
77 Tul. L. Rev. 309 (2002)