選購法院（forum shopping）一向是國際私法上廣受爭議的一個問題，也是平行訴訟（parallel proceedings）問題中一項重要的考慮點。到目前為止，國際私法學者間對於選購法院仍未有一致明確的定義，對於何種情形構成選購法院，或是選購法院的具體內涵，亦缺乏一定的共識。平行訴訟可謂是選購法院的後果，這種後果所可能帶來的訴訟程序不平等，以及判決歧異等風險，對於訴訟經濟的耗費以及判決效力的流通均可能是有害的。基於以上的考慮，國際私法學者幾均主張對於選購法院的現象必須加以限制。我國民事訴訟法第182條之2採用「先繫屬優先原則」，似乎難以有效限制選購法院的發生。而法院實務對於選購法院是否均應予以排除或限制之問題，態度亦不甚明確，因而造成判斷涉外案件中原告之起訴是否為選購法院，是否起訴具備詐欺管轄或濫用訴訟權利之要件等問題，也相應發生困難。本文期能就此借鏡外國學說及實務判決，釐清選購法院之基礎概念與內涵，並提出明確有效之對策，以為因應。

＂Forum shopping＂ is an old dispute which is often discussed in the area of study on private international law. It is also an important issue in the discussion of parallel proceedings. So far, there is not yet a clear definition of forum shopping. There is neither a consensus on its content, nor on which circumstance constitutes forum shopping among private international law scholars. Parallel proceedings could be considered as a consequence of forum shopping, which may bring an unequal procedure and risk of inconsistency of judgment. In addition, forum shopping may endanger the circulation of judgment; it could also increase litigation costs. Based on the above considerations, most of private international law scholars advocate that forum shopping must be prohibited or controlled by the court in civil case involving foreign elements. In Taiwan, article 182-2 of Civil Procedure Act adopts the rule of “lis alibi pendens”, which could not actually reduce the risk of forum shopping. In practice, the issue about weather Taiwan court should prohibit forum shopping or not is also not clear. It causes therefore some difficulties to identify forum shopping, especially in the case while there is jurisdiction fraud and abuse of process. This paper plans to learn from the experience of foreign doctrines and judgments, drawing the outline of forum shopping: It is hoped that this article may provide therefore an effective and practical countermeasure to our court in such cases.