What are the differences between forum non conveniens and res judicata in international litigation?

In international litigation, forum non conveniens (FNC) and res judicata (RJ) are two important legal considerations that come into play. The primary difference between the two is that FNC is a discretionary process used to determine whether a lawsuit should be heard in a particular jurisdiction, while RJ is a doctrine that prevents parties from relitigating a case already resolved by a court. FNC is a type of discretionary dismissal of a lawsuit that a court may choose to employ if the suit is not properly connected to the jurisdiction in which the court sits. The court can consider factors such as which court has the most familiarity with the facts and the law, the convenience of the parties involved, and the cost and time associated with the case in order to decide whether to dismiss the case or allow it to proceed. RJ, on the other hand, is a legal principle that prevents relitigation of a case that has already been resolved by a court. It bars parties from arguing the same points they made in a previous case, or from appealing the judgment of a prior case. This prevents the wasting of resources and time by having parties continually litigate the same disputes. In international litigation, both FNC and RJ provide critical considerations that determine the legitimacy and success of a case. The primary difference between them is that FNC is a discretionary process used to determine the proper jurisdiction for a lawsuit, while RJ is a legal doctrine that prevents parties from relitigating a case that has been previously resolved.

What are the differences between forum non conveniens and res judicata in international litigation?

Related FAQs

Related Blog Posts