4.2 Forum Non Conveniens

Forum non conveniens lets courts decline jurisdiction when another court is more suitable. It prevents forum shopping and ensures cases are heard in the best place. Judges weigh factors like access to evidence and witnesses to decide if a case should be dismissed.

This doctrine impacts plaintiffs' forum choices, especially in international cases. It requires careful consideration when selecting where to file, as the threat of dismissal can affect litigation strategy and settlement negotiations. Plaintiffs must be prepared to defend their forum choice.

Forum Non Conveniens Doctrine

Definition and Purpose

Top images from around the web for Definition and Purpose

• 

  Jurisdiction - Free of Charge Creative Commons Legal 1 image View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Types of Law and Jurisdiction | Texas Government 1.0 View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  The Dual Court System – American Government (2e) View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Jurisdiction - Free of Charge Creative Commons Legal 1 image View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Types of Law and Jurisdiction | Texas Government 1.0 View original

  Is this image relevant?

1 of 3

Top images from around the web for Definition and Purpose

• 

  Jurisdiction - Free of Charge Creative Commons Legal 1 image View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Types of Law and Jurisdiction | Texas Government 1.0 View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  The Dual Court System – American Government (2e) View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Jurisdiction - Free of Charge Creative Commons Legal 1 image View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Types of Law and Jurisdiction | Texas Government 1.0 View original

  Is this image relevant?

1 of 3

• Forum non conveniens allows courts to decline jurisdiction when an alternative forum proves more appropriate or convenient
• Prevents plaintiffs from forum shopping and ensures cases are heard in the most suitable venue
• Applies in federal and state courts with varying application between jurisdictions
• Discretionary doctrine enables judges to weigh factors for case dismissal in favor of an alternative forum
• Distinct from subject matter and personal jurisdiction assumes proper jurisdiction but chooses not to exercise it
• Invoked in domestic and international cases with international applications involving more complex considerations

Application and Scope

• Discretionary nature allows judges flexibility in applying the doctrine
• Threshold requirement involves availability of an adequate alternative forum
• Applies to cases where the court has proper jurisdiction but chooses not to exercise it
• Used in both domestic and international cases (U.S. courts vs foreign courts)
• International applications often involve additional considerations (diplomatic relations, international comity)
• Can be raised by defendants or the court sua sponte in some jurisdictions

Factors for Forum Non Conveniens

Alternative Forum Considerations

• Availability of an adequate alternative forum serves as a threshold requirement
• Alternative forum must have jurisdiction over all parties
• Remedy provided by alternative forum should not be clearly unsatisfactory
• Courts assess whether the alternative forum can provide substantive relief
• Consider the legal system and judicial process of the alternative forum (fairness, corruption)
• Evaluate potential undue hardship or danger to litigants in the alternative forum (political instability, human rights concerns)

Practical and Logistical Factors

• Relative ease of access to sources of proof including documents and witnesses
• Cost and practicality of obtaining attendance of willing witnesses
• Possibility of viewing premises if relevant to the case (site inspections)
• Enforceability of judgment in the alternative forum
• Relative advantages and obstacles to a fair trial in current and proposed alternative forums
• Administrative difficulties and court congestion in the chosen forum (less weight than other factors)
• Availability of compulsory process for unwilling witnesses

Impact on Plaintiff's Choice

Limitations on Forum Selection

• Significantly limits plaintiffs' ability to choose their preferred forum potentially affecting case outcomes
• Disproportionately impacts foreign plaintiffs as their choice of U.S. forum receives less deference
• Requires careful consideration of potential dismissal when selecting a forum (transnational litigation)
• Influences settlement negotiations and litigation strategy (threat of dismissal)
• Necessitates demonstrating strong connection to chosen forum to overcome challenges
• Increases litigation costs for plaintiffs defending against forum non conveniens motions
• Leads to potential delays in dispute resolution (motions to dismiss, appeals)

Strategic Considerations

• Plaintiffs must anticipate and prepare for potential forum non conveniens challenges
• May require gathering evidence to support the choice of forum (connections to jurisdiction)
• Consider filing in multiple forums simultaneously to mitigate risk of dismissal
• Evaluate the strength of the case in potential alternative forums
• Assess the impact of different substantive laws in potential forums (choice of law analysis)
• Consider the potential for parallel proceedings in multiple jurisdictions
• Analyze the likelihood of enforcement of judgment in different forums

Private vs Public Interest Factors

Private Interest Factors

• Focus on convenience of litigants
• Access to evidence (physical evidence, documents)
• Availability of witnesses (both willing and unwilling)
• Enforceability of judgments in the chosen forum
• Relative ease of conducting discovery in the chosen forum
• Costs associated with litigating in the chosen forum (travel expenses, translation costs)
• Ability to join additional parties if necessary

Public Interest Factors

• Consider impact on court system and community
• Administrative burden on the court (docket congestion, judicial resources)
• Local interest in the controversy (community impact, local policies)
• Familiarity with governing law (application of foreign law)
• Avoid conflicts of laws or application of foreign law when possible
• Unfairness of burdening citizens with jury duty in an unrelated forum
• Interest in having localized controversies decided at home
• Public policies of the forums (both current and alternative)