维生素C反垄断案中的外国法查明问题及对中国的启示  

The Ascertainment of Foreign Law in In Re Vitamin C Antitrust Litigation and the Implications for Chinese Courts

作　　者：甘勇[1] Gan Yong

机构地区：[1]武汉大学法学院、武汉大学国际法研究所

出　　处：《国际法研究》2019年第4期95-116,共22页Chinese Review of International Law

摘　　要：美国动物科学产品公司诉河北维尔康制药有限公司案历经美国联邦地区法院,美国联邦第二巡回上诉法院,美国联邦最高法院三审后,再度发回第二巡回上诉法院重审,其中外国法(中国相关法律)的查明是该案反复争议的问题。美国普通法有关外国政府声明的规定模糊,以及美国法院对美国《联邦民事诉讼法》第44.1条规定的不同解读,导致地区法院和第二巡回上诉法院对中国法内容的解释截然相反,其理由也针锋相对。联邦最高法院一锤定音,对外国法查明中外国政府声明确立了新的规则,即外国政府作出有关本国法内容和解释的声明,并不必然具有绝定性效力,而应结合具体情况来判断应该赋予声明以何种效力。要促进中国涉外司法审判,中国法院不仅应该学习美国法院对外国法查明的慎重态度和专业精神,同时,中国外国法查明制度设计上的瑕疵也应引起重视,予以纠正。In Re Vitamin C Antitrust Litigation, which has gone through U.S. federal district court, the Second Circuit Court of Appeals and the Supreme Court, was remanded by the Supreme Court to the Second Circuit Court of Appeals for retrial, in which the ascertainment of foreign law was the key issue leading to different results at different levels.Due to ambiguity of American law regarding the effects of a foreign government declarations on its own law, and various interpretations of Rule 44.1 of Federal Civil Procedure Rule, the District Court and the Second Circuit Court of Appeals drew exactly opposite conclusions with conflicting reasons. The Supreme Court gave its final say, establishing a new rule in this connection. It declares that a foreign government declaration on its domestic law and its interpretations should not necessarily command conclusive deference, instead they can only be substantially deferred under the circumstances. In order to promote Chinese foreign-related adjudication, Chinese courts can not only learn from American courts in their serious attitude toward and professional spirits in ascertaining foreign law, the defects in the design of ascertainment of foreign law should also be heeded and corrected.

关 键 词：维生素C反垄断案 外国法查明 外国政府声明 实质性尊重 高度尊重 

分 类 号：D971.2[政治法律—法学] DD915.2