国家管辖豁免视域下疫情索赔诉讼法律问题与应对  

Legal Issues and Responses to Litigation of Epidemic Claims in the Context of National Jurisdictional Immunity

作　　者：沈伟[1] Shen We

机构地区：[1]上海交通大学凯原法学院

出　　处：《国际关系与国际法学刊》2023年第1期1-31,共31页Journal of International Relations and International Law

摘　　要：就美国多地向中国及相关主体提出的涉疫情索赔之诉而言,法院管辖权是案件审理的前提性问题,亦是判断这些诉讼是否属于“滥诉”的试金石。本文将国家管辖豁免问题分成“主体标准”和“行为标准”,首先从“主体标准”出发,提出“概括+否定排除式”的主体范围界定标准,认为“能直接代表国家从事行为的主体为国家管辖豁免的主体,但国家元首行政首长外的自然人除外。国内法律或条约另有规定的,依照其规定”,从而认定中国各级政府、各部委、中国共产党、中科院享有管辖豁免资格,而自然人、研究所不属于管辖豁免主体。“行为标准”可以用来阐释采取绝对豁免和限制豁免两种立场的国家对于“国家”主体行为的不同态度。本文介绍了限制豁免国家区分行为性质对具体案件进行管辖的做法,通过分析美国《外国主权豁免法》中的豁免例外,论证了中国的信息通报、防疫抗疫行为不符合商业活动例外“性质说”要求、非商业侵权例外“完整侵权原则”、恐怖主义例外“清单主体”和“穷尽救济要件”,得出了涉疫情诉讼中国不受美国法院管辖的结论。最后,针对美国国会出现的要求修改美国《外国主权豁免法》以向中国索赔,本文认为即使修法成功,中国可以采取外交交涉、积极运用美国限制豁免立场而非“不接受管辖、不出庭应诉、不承认裁决”、主张执行豁免、提交国际法院诉讼等方式加以应对。In the case of the lawsuits related to epidemic claims filed in China and related subjects in the United States,the jurisdiction of the court is a prerequisite for the trial of the case and a touchstone for judging whether these lawsuits are“abusive”.This paper divides the issue of state jurisdictional immunity into“subjective criteria”and“behavioral criteria”,and firstly,from the“subjective criteria”,we propose a general+The scope of the scope of the subject is defined in a“general+negative exclusion”manner,and it is considered that“subjects who can directly perform acts on behalf of the state are subjects of immunity from state jurisdiction,with the exception of natural persons other than the chief executive of the state.If domestic laws or treaties provide otherwise,they shall be in accordance with the provisions thereof”,thus concluding that Chinese governments at all levels,ministries and commissions,the CPC,and the CAS enjoy jurisdictional immunity,while natural persons and the Wuhan Virus Institute are not subjects of jurisdictional immunity.The“conduct criterion”can be used to explain the different attitudes of states that take the position of absolute and restricted immunity with respect to the conduct of“state”subjects.By analyzing the exceptions to immunity under the U.S.Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act,the paper argues that China's notification of information,prevention of and fight against epidemics do not meet the requirements of the“nature of commercial activity exception,”the“non-commercial tort exception,”and the“terrorism exception”.and the“exhaustion of remedies element”of the terrorism exception,and concludes that China is not subject to the jurisdiction of U.S.courts in epidemic-related litigation.Finally,in response to the demand of the U.S.Congress to amend the U.S.Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act to claim against China,this paper argues that even if the amendment is successful,China can respond by diplomatic intervention,active use of the U.S

关 键 词：国家管辖豁免 主权平等 主体标准 行为标准 豁免例外 应对反制 

分 类 号：D992[政治法律—国际法学]