Connecticut § 50a-202 Factors considered in selection of adjudicating forum.

Connecticut Statutes

§ 50a-202 — Factors considered in selection of adjudicating forum.

Connecticut § 50a-202

Title 50aInternational Law

Ch. 863Conflict of Jurisdictions Model Law

This text of Connecticut § 50a-202 (Factors considered in selection of adjudicating forum.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Connecticut primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Conn. Gen. Stat. § 50a-202 (2026).

Text

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 lik

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

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.