Page 25 - ดุลพาห เล่ม3.indd

ดุลพาห

provides that Japanese courts may assert international jurisdiction over “an action
which has as its object a claim for performance of an obligation under a contract”, or

“an action which has as its object a claim in relation to an obligation under a contract,
including a claim pertaining to management performed without mandate or unjust

enrichment arising in relation to such obligation, and a claim for compensation for
damages caused by the non-performance of such obligation”, if the place of

performance of the obligation is within Japan . The place of performance is
41
determined by the terms of the contract or the law chosen by the parties.

Similarly, Article 7 (1) of the Brussels I (recast) provides that, in matters
relating to a contract, a person domiciled in a member state may be sued in the courts

of another member state, for the place of performance of the obligation in question.
It further specifies that the place of performance generally points to the place for

delivery of the goods or the performance of the service, in the case of contracts for the
sale of goods and contracts for the provision of services . In addition, the codes of
42
civil procedure in Germany and France also determine jurisdiction in contractual
43
44
disputes based on the place of performance of the obligation in question.

English common law rules, on the other hand, set forth six separate grounds
of jurisdiction for claims in relation to contracts . Two of these grounds are similar
45
to the Thai approach, comprising of claims which are made with respect to a contract
made within the jurisdiction and a breach of contract committed within the jurisdiction.

The remaining grounds include a claim made with respect to a contract made by or
through an agent trading or residing within the jurisdiction, contract governed by

English law, contract containing a choice-of-court clause which confers jurisdiction
on the English courts, or a claim made for a declaration in which no contract exists .
46

41. Yokomizo, “New Act on International Jurisdiction,” 106.
42. Hartley, “International Commercial Litigation,” 52.
43. Section 29 of the German Code of Civil Procedure.
44. Article 46 of the French Code of Civil Procedure.
45. UK Civil Procedure Rules, Rule 6.36 and Practice Direction 6B.
46. Hartley, “International Commercial Litigation,” 120-122.

14 เล่มที่ ๓ ปีที่ ๖๕