外国管制性法律的查明——以“维生素C反垄断诉讼案”为中心  

The a scertainment of Foreign Regulatory Law: Focusing on Vitamin C Antitrust Litigation

作　　者：宋晓[1] Song Xiao

机构地区：[1]南京大学法学院,江苏南京210093

出　　处：《法律科学（西北政法大学学报）》2021年第4期93-104,共12页Science of Law：Journal of Northwest University of Political Science and Law

基　　金：国家社科基金项目(18BFX218)“我国涉外民商事审判中选法规则的实证研究”。

摘　　要："维生素C反垄断诉讼案"历时十多年,引起了中美两国学界的高度关注。美国联邦最高法院在2018年推翻了联邦上诉法院的判决,认为不应高度遵从中国商务部以"法庭之友"身份出具的关于中国外贸管制法律的内容及其解释的声明。如果从作为案件准据法的外国私法查明一般原理出发,美国联邦最高法院的法律论证过程无可厚非。但是,外国管制性法律的查明有别于一般外国私法的查明,不应完全照搬适用外国法查明的一般规则。法官在查明外国管制性法律时应适用国际礼让原则,尤其应高度遵从外国政府对其管制性法律的出庭声明。It has been more than 10 years since the beginning of Vitamin C Antitrust Litigation and has not ended till now. Many scholars are more and more interested in this case and involved into discussion of the case both in China and in America. The Federal Supreme Court of USA reversed the judgment of the Court of Appeals in 2018, since the court decided that it was incorrect for the Appellate Court to be bound to the Amici Curiae statement submitted by the Ministry of Commerce of PRC. The argumentation presented by the Supreme Court seems plausible if from the general rule pertaining to the ascertainment of the foreign applicable law. But the ascertainment of foreign regulatory law by its nature is substantially different from the ascertainment of foreign private law. Particularly, judges should use the principle of international comity to ascertain and interpret foreign regulatory law, and especially should be bound to defer to the brief statements by foreign governments.

关 键 词：维生素C案 外国法查明 外国管制性法律 国际礼让 

分 类 号：D977[政治法律—法学]