中国不方便法院原则规定在2015年《民事诉讼法》司法解释中,其适 用条件共6项,其中一项条件是不存在实质性利益,该项条件被学界认为 严苛,从司法实践角度看,如何把握实质性利益的判断和标准,也确属 不易. 2017年,大连市中级人民法院在“渡边孝诉中川雄一、大连日研工业 有限公司案”中采用了主观灵活的做法,取代了过去司法实践中的机械方 式,这一做法不失为一个新视角,但同时也暴露出该原则在中国现有规 定下内在价值即诉讼正义与诉讼便利的冲突. 此外,作为与不方便法院原 则不分仲伯的禁诉令制度,在中国的建构也有实践可循并有确立之必要.
Interpretation of the Supreme People's Court on the Application of the Civil Procedure Law stipulates Chinese Forum non conveniens, including six elements. One of those element requires the case involves no substantial Chinese interest, which is deemed too rigorous and as an obstacle for judicial application. In 2017, Dalian Intermediate People's Court adopted a flexible way in case Takashi suing Nakagawa and Dalian Riyan Company, replacing the rigid approach before, which provides a new perspective but also reveals the conflict between justice and convenience in litigation under Chinese law. Furthermore, as the parallel institution, construction of Anti-suit Injunction is of vital necessity in China.