In its purest form, the
doctrine of
forum non
conveniens permits a court to deny jurisdiction of a matter where principles of justice and convenience favor dismissal. This
paper discusses the background and
history of the common-law doctrine of forum non conveniens, how the doctrine found its way into federal law, and how it eventually came to be used as a bar to lawsuits by
foreign plaintiffs in the United States. The paper then discusses some of the arguments advanced by opponents of forum non conveniens, and the suggestions they have made to correct the perceived inequities of the doctrine. Finally, the paper identifies some important issues that remain undecided under the modern doctrine. Paper Outline: Introduction History and Background of the Foreign Non Conveniens Doctrine History of the Doctrine of Forum Non Conveniens Private and Public Interest Factors Developed In Gulf Oil Corp. v. Gilbert Forum Non Conveniens Almost Goes Extinct The Modern "International" Doctrine of Foreign Non Conveniens Forum Non Conveniens Re-Emerges and Goes International Change of Law Loses Importance The Two-Part Forum Non Conveniens Test Application of the Modern Forum Non Conveniens Doctrine Problems with the "New" Application of the Forum Non Conveniens Doctrine Alternatives to the Forum Non Conveniens Doctrine Other Issues Identified by Federal Courts Conclusion
More abstracts about the Forum Non Conveniens Doctrine