Are these "diverse" protocols be valid?Judge of the case for the case one by one

The jurisdiction of the agreement generally refers to the parties to reach jurisdiction clauses in writing before or before the civil dispute occurred before or before the occurrence of civil disputes. Article 30 of the "Interpretation of the Civil Procedure Law" stipulates that according to the jurisdiction agreement, if the court can determine when prosecution, it shall not be determined in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Civil Procedure Law. So, how to determine whether the agreement jurisdiction is valid? The Judge of Haidian Court will answer the common questions jurisdiction over the agreement by the case.

Case 1: It is agreed that the plaintiff's residence court has jurisdiction when the plaintiff's residence is prosecuted to the local court

Qin Yi Company signed the "Employee Training Contract" with Wei Fang Company. Qinyi is located in Qingxiu District, Nanning City, Guangxi Province. Wei Fang Company is located in Haidian District, Beijing. Later, because Wei Fang company could not continue to fulfill its training obligations, Qin Yi filed a lawsuit in his local court. During the defense period, Wei Fang filed a jurisdiction of objections, arguing that the contract orientation of the contract was unknown. It was claimed that the case should be under the jurisdiction of the defendant's location, that is, the Haidian District Court.

In this case, the contract is directed at the provisions of Article 35 of the Civil Procedure Law in accordance with Article 35 of the Civil Procedure Law. Jurisdiction of the court. The agreement to choose the agreement is clear, and the plaintiff's residence court has jurisdiction at the time of the prosecution. As the plaintiff, Qin Yi can sue to the court of his residence, and the court has jurisdiction.

Judge said:

Article 35 of the Civil Procedure Law stipulates that "the parties can choose a written agreement to choose the defendant's residence, the place of contract, the place of contract signing, the place where the plaintiff's residence, the place where the subject is located, etc. "".

According to the Supreme People's Court (2005) People's Court (2005) People's Court (2005) People's Court No. 94, the Supreme People's Court of the Supreme People's Court. The court jurisdiction and the agreement is valid. The true meaning of the parties is that there are disputes in the contract involved in the case. As a plaintiff's lawsuit, any party can choose the plaintiff's local people's court as the jurisdiction of the court. The agreement to choose the agreement is clear, and the plaintiff's residence court has jurisdiction at the time of the prosecution.

In this type of case, if the parties have filed a lawsuit with the court where they are located, they should be under the jurisdiction of the court of first case; if the case time is difficult to distinguish between the two places, the two places should be resolved; Essence

Case 2: The agreement shall be determined that the jurisdiction shall be determined that the jurisdiction shall be determined that the jurisdiction is invalid.

Feiyu Company, located in Haidian District, Beijing, signed the "Rice Supply Contract" with Zhening Company, located in Tongzhou District, Beijing, and provided rice supply to Zheining for a long time. The contract stipulates that if there is a dispute between the two parties, the contract is under the jurisdiction of the contract. Later, due to the quality problem of the rice supplied by Feiyu Company, Zhening filed a lawsuit in accordance with the contract.

In this case, due to the unclear convention of the contract, it is impossible to determine which party is the deserved party before the prosecution. The agreement is invalid. The local court jurisdiction. Because the contract in this case did not agree to the place of the contract. The controversy in this case is to "fulfill the obligations" and fulfill the obligations as the defendant's residence.

Judge said:

To judge who the party's contract is required, it is necessary to undergo a physical trial, and it cannot be found at the stage of determining the jurisdiction. The regulations shall be determined that the agreement shall be invalid.

According to the provisions of Article 30 of the Interpretation of the Civil Procedure Law, according to the jurisdiction agreement, if the jurisdiction can be determined at the time of the prosecution, it shall be determined from its agreement; if it cannot be determined, the jurisdiction is determined in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Civil Procedure Law. Due to the convention of the contract, the court cannot be determined. The case of such cases shall be under the jurisdiction of the court or contract in accordance with Article 24 of the Civil Procedure Law.

Case 3: It is agreed that the jurisdiction of the local court shall be determined that the agreement shall be invalid

Shengchuang Company signed the "Supply Chain Service Contract" with Tian Tuan Corporation, which stipulates that if there is a dispute, the local court is under the jurisdiction of the local court. Shengchuang Company is located in Fengtai District, Beijing, and Tian Tuan Company is located in Haidian District, Beijing. Later, due to the long -term non -payment service fee, Shengchuang Company filed a lawsuit in his local court.

In this case, although the service contract between the two parties stipulated a lawsuit to the local court, the local court was not clear and it was impossible to determine which two or two courts of the local court. In this case, the agreement is invalid and can only be under the jurisdiction of the court's residence or contract in accordance with Article 24 of the Civil Procedure Law.

Because the controversy in this case is "paying currency", when the contract does not agree on the contract performance of the contract, the Shengchuang Company provided by the service party has jurisdiction as the "payment currency party". Therefore, the Shengchuang Company in this case can file a lawsuit with the Fengtai Court.

Judge said:

Local courts are unclear jurisdiction agreements in judicial practice. What is the unknown of the local referring to is often controversial. Some are understood as the place where the parties live, some are understood as the place of contract performance, and some are understood according to the type of contract. In this case, it is agreed that the local court cannot determine which or which court under the jurisdiction of the contract between the contract, and it should be determined that the agreement is invalid. According to the provisions of Article 30 of the Interpretation of the Civil Procedure Law, according to the jurisdiction agreement, if the jurisdiction can be determined at the time of the prosecution, it shall be determined from its agreement; if it cannot be determined, the jurisdiction is determined in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Civil Procedure Law. Due to the local court's agreement cannot determine the jurisdiction, such cases shall be under the jurisdiction of the court or contract in accordance with Article 24 of the Civil Procedure Law.

Case 4: Labor disputes, etc., such as the agreement of the affiliated attribute is not applicable to the agreement jurisdiction over the agreement jurisdiction

After graduating from Zhang Wen, Zhang Wen signed a labor contract with Zhongtong Company. The contract stipulates that if the two parties have a labor dispute, the contract is signed by the contract to the Beijing Haidian District Court. Zhongtong Company is located in Hefei City, Anhui Province. One year after working, Zhang Wen filed a labor arbitration on the Labor Arbitration Commission of Bengbu City, Bengbu City, Bengbu City, Anhui Province. After the prosecution, Zhongtong Company filed a jurisdiction objection on the grounds that the Haidian Court's jurisdiction was agreed on the jurisdiction of the Haidian Court.

In this case, the labor contract between the original defendants agreed to sign a special agreement with human attributes to the Beijing Haidian District Court, but the labor contract is a special agreement that has a person's attributes. Therefore, the jurisdiction of this case is invalid, and the Bengbu City Court of Bengbu City has jurisdiction as a labor contract to perform the court.

Judge said:

Article 35 of the Civil Procedure Law is the legal provisions on the "jurisdiction of the agreement", and the regulations are only applicable to disputes between contracts or other property rights and interests. Therefore, a special agreement with human attributes does not conform to the contract or other property rights disputes that may agree on the jurisdiction. The jurisdiction should not be applied to the jurisdiction.

Labor dispute cases shall be under the jurisdiction of the grassroots people's court where the employer is located or the labor contract is performed by the "Supreme People's Court on the Application of Labor Dispute Cases (1)" in the Supreme People's Court. If the labor contract is unclear, the grass -roots people's court where the employer is located is under the jurisdiction.

Case 5: The agreed to determine the jurisdiction in the place of performance agreed in the contract with the actual performance

Zheyu Company signed the "Personnel Training Contract" with Qihui Company. The contract stipulates that if the dispute occurs, the contract is under the jurisdiction of the Beijing Haidian District Court where Qihui Company is located. After the contract was signed, Qihui Company changed its residence to Tongzhou District, Beijing due to the company's operating problems. Personnel training is actually fulfilled in Tongzhou. Later, because Qihui did not pay the training fee, Zheyu Company filed a lawsuit in accordance with the contract. During the defense period, Qihui Company proposed an objection to the jurisdiction and believed that the actual place of the contract was Tongzhou District, Beijing. The contract agreement did not match the actual performance.

In this case, the place of performance stipulated in the contract is Haidian District, and according to Article 18 of the Interpretation of the Civil Procedure Law, it shall be used as the basis of the place of performance agreed in the contract. Therefore, the Haidian Court has jurisdiction in this case.

Judge said:

Article 18 of the "Interpretation of the Civil Law" stipulates that the "contract stipulated in the contract is fulfilled, and the agreed place is performed as the place of performance of the contract." According to the regulations, the determination of the contract is determined by the part of the contract. The clearly agreed place is the place of contract performance.

Here we should pay attention to the three concepts of "actual performance of contractual performance" and "" and "" "contract performance place". According to Article 18 of the Interpretation of the Civil Law, if the parties do not agree on the place of contract performance, they can determine the place of contract performance in accordance with the place of actual implementation; land. When the actual place of fulfillment is inconsistent with the compliance of the contract, because the place of performance stipulated in the contract belongs to the place of contract performance in the procedural law, the place of performance agreed in the contract should be used as the basis for determining the case.

(The characters in the text are all about the name)

Text/Chen Chen, Haidian Court

- END -