长期以来,提单管辖权条款的效力问题在国内外学界和实务界存在较大的争议。理论上,提单管辖权条款往往是以格式条款而并非当事人之间的协议等理由被认定无效,实践中法院也会因为侵权诉因、与争议无实际联系、不方便法院原则、对等原则和有降低承运人责任之嫌为由限制提单管辖权条款的效力。对待提单管辖权条款的效力,法院并非一概而论,而是有条件的限制。本文在通过对提单管辖权条款性质进行分析的基础上,得出立法和司法承认该条款效力时考量的因素。同时,本文将结合理论依据和实践做法综合分析,旨在探究法院在判断提单管辖权条款效力时,应当如何坚持有“限制”的尊重其效力,以及从确保货方利益的角度出发考虑在某些情况下排除该条款的效力。如此一来,不仅可以很好地尊重当事人意志,同时也有利于我国司法实践中对管辖权制度的整体安排。 For a long time, the issue of the validity of the bill of lading jurisdiction has big controversies both at home and abroad. In theory, the terms of the bill of lading jurisdiction are often invalidated on the basis of the clause of the form and not the agreement between the parties. In practice, the court will also be invalid because of the cause of the infringement, no actual connection with the dispute, the principle of the forum of inconvenience, the principle of reciprocity There is a suspicion of reducing the carrier’s liability to limit the validity of the terms of the bill of lading jurisdiction. The validity of the provisions of the bill of lading jurisdiction, the court is not generalized, but conditional restrictions. Based on the analysis of the nature of the bill of lading jurisdiction, this paper draws the conclusion that legislation and judiciary consider the validity of the clause. At the same time, this article will combine the theoretical basis with the comprehensive analysis of practice, aiming at exploring how courts should insist on the validity of the provisions of the bill of lading in respect of the effectiveness of the provisions of the bill of lading, as well as from the perspective of ensuring the interests of the cargoes In some cases, the validity of the clause is excluded. In this way, not only the parties’ will to be well respected, but also the overall arrangement of the jurisdiction system in our judicial practice.