Abstract: This book provides a comprehensive comparative review of the common law doctrine of forum non conveniens as it is practiced and applied in the United Kingdom, the United States, Canada, and Australia. The authors catalogue the similarities and distinctions among the common law countries in which the doctrine is applied, and compare the doctrine to related procedures in civil law jurisdictions. The book then extends the analysis of parallel litigation issues addressed in the doctrine of forum non conveniens by considering the work of delegations to the Hague Conference on Private International Law who worked to draft a global convention on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments. The authors capture for historical analysis the important compromises made in the draft convention on jurisdiction and judgments between the discretion allowed courts in the common law doctrine of forum non conveniens and the rigid practice of civil law courts in the application of their doctrine of lis alibi pendens. Finally, attention is given to the way in which the 2005 Hague Convention on Choice of Court Agreements will affect the application of the doctrine of forum non conveniens when parties have entered into an exclusive choice of court agreement.

Keywords: forum non conveniens, lis pendens, parallel litigation, jurisdiction, judicial discretion, declining jurisdiction, Hague Convention on Choice of Court Agreements, Brussels Regulation