Even the proper application of the prevailing doctrines of forum non conveniens and foreign judgment recognition and enforcement can lead to what some commentators have described as a transnational access-to-justice gap that, at least in some instances, yields facially unjust results. This Note seeks to discuss the origin and implications of this doctrinal disparity, and to analyze several potential ways of mitigating it. Part I will examine the prevailing standards for forum non conveniens and judgment recognition and enforcement as applied in U.S courts. Part II will discuss some of the outstanding issues related to the interplay between these doctrines. Part III discusses a range of possible solutions to the issues discussed in Part II. This Note concludes, in Part IV, by proposing a hybrid solution involving the federalization of both forum non conveniens (via the passage of a federal statute) and judgment recognition and enforcement (accomplished by joining the proposed Hague Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments).

Continue reading Bridging the Gap: Addressing the Doctrinal Disparity Between Forum Non Conveniens and Judgment Recognition and Enforcement in Transnational Litigation.