|I General remarks169|
|II No forum non conveniens doctrine169|
|III Lis alibi pendens171|
|IV Foreign choice of jurisdiction clauses172|
|V Arbitration agreements172|
|VI Restraining foreign proceedings173|
Private international law has traditionally been a matter rather neglected by the Finnish legislator, and this is even more so for international procedural law.1 Neither has judicial practice developed clear rules. For this reason it is relatively easy to write the Finnish chapter, and I will in the discussion follow the agenda set forth by Professor Fawcett.
In spite of the lack of a doctrine of forum non conveniens similar reasoning is to a certain extent employed by using different concepts.____________________