Meaning
Procedural strategy where a litigant selects a court that is most likely to provide a favorable outcome for their specific case. Legal representatives use forum shopping to exploit differences in local laws, judicial precedents, or procedural rules across different jurisdictions. This practice occurs in both domestic and international disputes where multiple courts have the authority to hear a matter.
Jurisdictional Advantage
Court selection affects the speed of litigation, the availability of damages, and the likelihood of securing preliminary remedies. A plaintiff engaging in forum shopping seeks to maximize these procedural benefits by filing in a venue known for high patent holder success rates or generous jury awards. This choice can shift the balance of power before the defense even files its first response, forcing the opposing party to negotiate from a position of weakness.
Legal Constraint
Judicial doctrines like forum non conveniens allow a court to dismiss a case if another venue is more appropriate and convenient. This rule prevents egregious attempts at forum shopping by forcing the dispute back to a jurisdiction with a closer connection to the parties or the underlying events. Courts frequently analyze where the evidence and witnesses are located to decide these motions.
Corporate Strategy
Contractual clauses specifying both the choice of law and the exclusive venue protect businesses from unexpected litigation in hostile courts. Incorporating these provisions into supply agreements prevents foreign counterparties from initiating forum shopping after a dispute arises. These clauses provide predictability for long-term investments.
