國際私法對消費者之保護－以涉外消費契約事件之國際裁判管轄及準據法選擇為中心

Consumer Protection in Private International Law: With Emphasis on the International Jurisdiction to Adjudicate in Consumer Contract Cases and the Choice of Law of Consumer Contracts

10.6868/HKLR.202112_(71).02

吳光平(Kuang-Ping Wu)

價值中立 ； 價值取向 ； 消費者保護 ； 消費契約 ； 國際裁判管轄 ； 保護管轄 ； 準據法選擇 ； 具實體法目的之雙面衝突法則 ； Value-Neutralized ； Value-Oriented ； Consumer Protection ； Consumer Contract ； International Jurisdiction to Adjudicate ； Protective Jurisdiction ； Choice of Law ； Result-Oriented Conflicts Rules

華岡法粹

71期（2021 / 12 / 01）

41 - 117

繁體中文

本文以國際私法對消費者之保護為題，就晚近若干國際私法立法所形成以保護消費者為目的之消費契約國際裁判管轄法則及消費契約衝突法則立法新趨勢，介紹並分析之，最後並對現行法基於保護消費者之原則應如何解釋適用，以及將來消費契約國際裁判管轄法則及消費契約衝突法則之增訂，提出建議。保護消費者於今時已成為國際共同價值，而服務實體法之國際私法，面對實體結果所欲追求的保護消費者之實體正義，應有所調整，方能更有效率地協力於達成保護消費者之實體正義。國際私法為因應此，乃將保護消費者之實體正義融入涉外消費契約事件國際裁判管轄權之決定及準據法之選擇，於涉外消費契約國際裁判管轄權決定階段及準據法選擇階段即執行消費者保護，於國際裁判管轄採行保護管轄，於衝突法則採取具保護消費者目的之雙面衝突法則，便利消費者接近法院以利用國際裁判管轄制度主張權利或防衛權利之程序保障目的及保護消費者之實體正義目的。

Cross-border consumers' access to justice has become a commonly debated topic in the contemporary world, especially with the contribution and influence of e-commerce. In a globalized world, where the fact of being a consumer is a valuable asset, the cross-border implications of consumer contracts need to be effectively tackled by legislators. The protection of consumers is a phenomenon that is gaining ever increasing importance. Consumer contracts generate original questions which have not been considered under traditional private international law theories. The application of private international law to consumer contracts raises new and complex questions. The assertion-of-court's-jurisdiction methodology and choice-of-law methodology are both based on contracts with a specific location so that they make the traditional private international law value-neutralized tool. The value-neutralized tool is based on contacts with a specific location that interferes with and breaks the goal and the enforcement of the consumer protection. For the purpose of eliminating the interference caused by the value-neutralized tool that interferes and breaks the goal and the enforcement of consumer protection, private international law should not keep its neutral nature but incorporates consumer protection. To incorporate consumer protection into private international law means to consider material consequence in advance when processing the assertion-of-court's-jurisdiction process and the choice-of-law process, and it makes private international law from the value-neutralized private international law to the value-oriented private international law. Consumer protection in private international law is now an integral part of legal systems around the world. It has also penetrated the realm of private international law. In this article, attention will be focused on the jurisdictional rules and conflicts rules relating to consumer contracts. This article will analyze how private international law incorporates consumer protection into the assertion-of-court's-jurisdiction process and the choice-of-law process. Finally, this article will make suggestions to ＂Law Governing the Application of Laws to Civil Matters Involving Foreign Elements＂ of R.O.C..

1. 何佳芳(2016)。從日本民事訴訟法之修正論國際裁判管轄規則法制化。輔仁法學，52，101-187。
   連結：
2. 吳光平(2009)。國際私法上當事人意思自主原則之研究－以契約運用當事人意思自主原則之界線為中心。東海大學法學研究，30，271-352。
   連結：
3. Behr, Volker(2011).Rome I Regulation a-Mostly-Unified Private International Law of Contractual Relationships within-Most-of the European Union.J. LAW & COMMER.,29,233-272.
4. Blom, Joost(2014).Regulation of Contracts in Canadian Private International Law.ARIZ. J. INT’L & COMP. L.,31,21-42.
5. Caravaca, Alfonso-Luis Calvo(2020).Consumer Contracts in the European Court of Justice Case Law: Latest Trends.CUADERNOS DE DERECHO TRANSNACIONAL,12,86-96.
6. D’Oliverira, Hans Ulrich Jessurun(1977).“Characteristic Obligation” in the Draft EEC Obligation Convention.AM. J. COMP. L.,25,301-331.
7. De Bore, Th. M.(2001).European Conflicts Law in the 21st Century.INTERNATIONAL CONFLICTS FOR THE THIRD MILLENNIUM: ESSAYS IN HONOR OF FRIEDRICH K. JUENGER Transnational Publishers Inc
8. Galič, Aleš(2016).Jurisdiction over Consumer, Employment, and Insurance Contracts under the Brussels I Regulation Recast: Enhancing the Protection of the Weaker Party.AUSTRIAN L. J.,3,122-134.
9. Gogichaishvili, Elene(2018).Comparative Analysis of Consumer Protection Under the Law of Georgia on Private International Law and the Rome I Regulation.GEORGIAN L. J.,2,27-36.
10. HATZIMIHAIL, NIKITAS E.(2021).PRECLASSICAL CONFLICT OF LAWS.NY:Cambridge University Press.
11. JUENGER, FRIEDEICH K.(2005).CHOICE OF LAW AND MULTISTATE JUSTICE.NY:Transnational Publisher Inc..
12. Laziv, Vesna(2017).Procedural Position of a ‘Weaker Party in the Regulation Brussels I bis.BRUSSELS I BIS REGULATION: CHANGES AND CHALLENGES OF THE RENEWED PROCEDURAL SCHEME,The Hague:
13. NYGH, PETER(1999).AUTONOMY IN INTERNATIONAL CONTRACTS.NY:Oxford University Press.
14. RABEL, ERNST(1958).THE CONFLICT OF LAWS: A COMPARATIVE STUDY (Vol. Ⅰ).MI:The University of Michigan Press.
15. Rango, Francesca(2009).The Law Applicable to Consumer Contracts under the Rome I Regulation.ROME I REGULATION: THE LAW APPLICABLE TO CONTRACTUAL OBLIGATIONS IN EUROPE,Munich:
16. Rühl, Giesela(2015).The Protection of Weaker Parties in the Private International Law of the European Union: A Portrait of Inconsistency and Conceptual Truancy.J. PRIV. INT’L L.,10,335-358.
17. SCHÄFER, KERSTIN ANN-SUSAN(2010).APPLICATION OF MANDATORY RULES IN THE PRIVATE INTERNATIONAL LAW OF CONTRACTS.Berlin:Peter Lang.
18. SYMEONIDES, SYMEON C.(2006).THE AMERICAN CHOICE-OF-LAW REVOLUTION:PAST, PRESENT AND FUTURE.NY:Martinus Nijhoff Publishers.
19. Symeonides, Symeon C.(ed.)(2000).PRIVATE INTERNATIONAL LAW AT THE END OF THE 20th CENTURY: PROGRESS OR REGRESS?.MA:Kluwer Law International Ltd..
20. Vischer, Frank B.(1992).General Course on Private International Law.RECUEIL DES COURS,232,9-255.
21. 大江忠(2021)。要件事実国際私法（3）国際民事手続法。第一法規。
22. 中西康、北澤安紀、溝大、林貴美(2014)。国際私法。有斐閣。
23. 本間靖規、中野俊一郎、酒井一(2012)。国際民事手続法。有斐閣。
24. 伊藤真(2020)。民事訴訟法。有斐閣。
25. 西谷祐子(2007)。消費者契約及び労働契約の準拠法と絶対的強行法規の適用問題。国際私法年報，9，29-77。
26. 吳光平(2014)。法律行為之特徵性債務與關係最切之法律－臺灣臺北地方法院一○二年度勞訴字第五五號判決評析。月旦法學雜誌，235，257-270。
27. 吳光平(2013)。國際合意管轄之效果－從最高法院一○一年度台抗字第二五九號裁定談起。月旦法學雜誌，220，289-300。
28. 吳光平(2005)。當事人意思自主原則與契約自由原則的互動－國際私法衝突法則與實體法間關係初探（上）。財產法暨經濟法，4，123-168。
29. 吳光平,劉鐵錚大法官八秩華誕祝壽論文集編輯委員會（編）(2018)。外國法之證明與調查－著重於程序法理之分析。新時代法學理論之建構與開創－劉鐵錚大法官八秩華誕祝壽論文集
30. 李伸一(1995).消費者保護法論.凱崙出版社.
31. 林恩瑋(2013).國際私法理論與案例研究.五南圖書出版股份有限公司.
32. 林益山(1994).消費者保護法.五南圖書出版股份有限公司.
33. 邱聰智,姚志明（修訂）(2013).新訂民法債編通則（上）.承法數位文化公司.
34. 邱聯恭(2018)。民事訴訟之目的－以消費者保護訴訟為例。程序制度機能論
35. 邱聯恭(2000).程序選擇權論.自版.
36. 姜世明(2016).民事訴訟法（上）.新學林出版股份有限公司.
37. 許士宦(2016).民事訴訟法（上）.新學林出版股份有限公司.
38. 陳自強(2018).民法講義 I：契約之成立與生效.元照出版有限公司.
39. 陳隆修(2005)。以實體法方法論為選法規則之基礎（下）。東海大學法學研究，22，307-372。
40. 陳隆修(2004)。以實體法方法論為選法規則之基礎（上）。東海大學法學研究，21，185-242。
41. 陳榮傳(2002)。國際私法立法的新思維－衝突規則的實體正義。月旦法學雜誌，89，50-61。
42. 陳榮傳(2012)。國際私法的新開展－民國一百年新法的特色與適用。月旦法學雜誌，200，267-281。
43. 黃進（編）,姜茹嬌（編）(2011).中華人民共和國涉外民事關係法律適用法釋義與分析.法律出版社.
44. 道垣內正人(1999)。ポイント国際私法総論。有斐閣。
45. 道垣內正人(2010)。日本の新しい国際裁判管轄立法について。国際私法年報，12，186-211。
46. 鄒國勇(2017).外國國際私法立法選譯.武漢大學出版社.
47. 賴來焜(1998)。國際私法最新資料選編。國際私法理論與實踐－劉鐵錚教授六秩華誕祝壽論文集（二）
48. 櫻田嘉章(2006)。国際私法。有斐閣。
49. 櫻田嘉章、道垣內正人(2011)。注釈国際私法第 1 巻。有斐閣。