Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- Preface
- List of Abbreviations
- Table of Cases
- PART I Introduction
- PART II Jurisdiction
- 2 Jurisdiction in electronic contracting
- 3 EU rules applied in cyber jurisdiction
- 4 US jurisdiction tests employed in e-contracting disputes
- 5 Chinese legislation on jurisdiction
- PART III Choice of law
- PART IV Online dispute resolution
- PART V The future
- Appendix 1 Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 of 22 December 2000 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters (Brussels I)
- Appendix 2 Regulation (EC) No 593/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 June 2008 on the law applicable to contractual obligations (Rome I)
- Bibliography
- Index
4 - US jurisdiction tests employed in e-contracting disputes
from PART II - Jurisdiction
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 03 May 2011
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- Preface
- List of Abbreviations
- Table of Cases
- PART I Introduction
- PART II Jurisdiction
- 2 Jurisdiction in electronic contracting
- 3 EU rules applied in cyber jurisdiction
- 4 US jurisdiction tests employed in e-contracting disputes
- 5 Chinese legislation on jurisdiction
- PART III Choice of law
- PART IV Online dispute resolution
- PART V The future
- Appendix 1 Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 of 22 December 2000 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters (Brussels I)
- Appendix 2 Regulation (EC) No 593/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 June 2008 on the law applicable to contractual obligations (Rome I)
- Bibliography
- Index
Summary
Overview of the US jurisdiction tests
The global community must address complex issues involving choice of law and jurisdiction – how to decide where a virtual transaction takes place.
Perhaps due to the fact that US companies are at the forefront of Internet technology, litigation regarding e-commerce in the US is more advanced than anywhere else in the world. Similar to the general and special jurisdiction under the EU Brussels regime, US law has two types of jurisdiction: general and specific. General jurisdiction is jurisdiction over the defendant for any cause of action, whether or not related to the defendant's contacts with the forum state; whereas specific jurisdiction applies when the underlying claims arise out of, or are directly related to, a defendant's contacts with the forum state.
The above notion comes from the famous case International Shoe Co v. Washington, which indicated that the minimum contacts test has both a general and a specific component. What is meant by “minimum contacts”? It is a requirement that must be satisfied before a defendant can be sued in a particular state. In order for the suit to go forward in the chosen state, the defendant must have some connection with that state. For example, advertising in or having business offices within a state may provide minimum contacts between a company and the state.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Internet Jurisdiction and Choice of LawLegal Practices in the EU, US and China, pp. 65 - 78Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2010