CHAPTER 863
CONFLICT OF JURISDICTIONS MODEL LAW

      Sec. 50a-200. Short title: Conflict of Jurisdictions Model Law. Sections 50a-201 to 50a-203, inclusive, may be cited as the "Conflict of Jurisdictions Model Law".

      (P.A. 91-324, S. 10.)

      Sec. 50a-201. Discretion to enforce judgments. (a) In cases where two or more proceedings arising out of the same transaction or occurrence were pending, the courts of this state shall enforce in accordance with the provisions of chapter 861 the judgments of any of such courts only if application for designation of an adjudicating forum was timely made to the first known court of competent jurisdiction where such a proceeding was commenced, or to the adjudicating forum after its selection, or to any court of competent jurisdiction if the foregoing courts were not courts of competent jurisdiction.

      (b) An application for designation of an adjudicating forum is timely if made within six months of reasonable notice of two such proceedings, or of reasonable notice of the selection of an adjudicating forum.

      (c) The determination of the adjudicating forum is binding for the purpose of enforcement of judgments in this state upon any person served with notice of an application to designate. The courts of this state shall enforce the judgments of the designated adjudicating forum in accordance with the provisions of chapter 861. The selection of the adjudicating forum shall be accorded presumptive validity in this state if the written decision determining the adjudicating forum evaluated the substance of the factors set forth in section 50a-202.

      (d) Where no conclusive determination has been made by another court as provided in this section, the proper adjudicating forum shall be determined in accordance with sections 50a-202 and 50a-203 by the courts of this state requested to enforce the judgment.

      (P.A. 91-324, S. 11.)

      Sec. 50a-202. Factors considered in selection of adjudicating forum. A determination of the adjudicating forum shall be made in consideration of the following factors:

      (1) The interests of justice among the parties and of world-wide justice;

      (2) The public policies of the countries having jurisdiction of the dispute, including the interest of the affected courts in having proceedings take place in their respective forums;

      (3) The place of occurrence, and of any effects, of the transaction or occurrence out of which the dispute arose;

      (4) The nationality of the parties;

      (5) Substantive law likely to be applicable and the relative familiarity of the affected courts with that law;

      (6) The availability of a remedy and the forum likely to render the most complete relief;

      (7) The impact of the litigation on the judicial systems of the courts involved, and the likelihood of prompt adjudication in the court selected;

      (8) Location of witnesses and availability of compulsory process;

      (9) Location of documents and other evidence and ease or difficulty associated with obtaining, reviewing or transporting such evidence;

      (10) Place of first filing and connection of such place to the dispute;

      (11) The ability of the designated forum to obtain jurisdiction over the persons and property that are the subject of the proceedings;

      (12) Whether designation of an adjudicating forum is a superior method to parallel proceedings in adjudicating the dispute;

      (13) The nature and extent of litigation that has proceeded over the dispute and whether a designation of an adjudicating forum will unduly delay or prejudice the adjudication of the rights of the original parties; and

      (14) A realigned plaintiff's choice of forum should rarely be disturbed.

      (P.A. 91-324, S. 12.)

      Sec. 50a-203. Evidence. (a) The court may consider any evidence admissible in the adjudicating forum or other court of competent jurisdiction, including but not limited to:

      (1) Affidavits or declarations;

      (2) Treaties to which the state of either forum is a party;

      (3) Principles of customary international law;

      (4) Testimony of fact or expert witnesses;

      (5) Diplomatic notes or amicus submissions from the state of the adjudicating forum or other court of competent jurisdiction; and

      (6) Statements of public policy by the state of the adjudicating forum or other court of competent jurisdiction set forth in legislation, executive or administrative action, learned treatises, or participation in intergovernmental organizations.

      (b) Reasonable written notice shall be given by any party seeking to raise an issue concerning the law of a forum of competent jurisdiction other than the adjudicating forum. In deciding questions of the law of another forum, the court may consider any relevant material or source, including testimony, whether or not admissible.

      (P.A. 91-324, S. 13.)