美国法院附设仲裁研究

发布时间：2018-04-19 10:38

本文选题：附设仲裁 + 实用主义　；参考：《西南政法大学》2013年博士论文

【摘要】：多元文化的融合与冲突既是美国的文化特征，亦是美国人接受多元解纷方式的社会条件。法院附设仲裁是美国在法院系统内创设的第一个ADR，并被誉为“司法ADR之父”。它是一种与传统仲裁迥然相异的纠纷解决机制，其发端于法院、运行于法院，且在诉讼的荫影下致力于纠纷的解决。法院附设仲裁的独特魅力在于其裁决不具约束力与终局性，却彰显了司法的公信力；其颠覆了人们对仲裁的传统认知却并非对传统仲裁之否定。法院附设仲裁不仅拓宽了仲裁的适用场域，还以其“庄严的非正式性”增加了“接近司法”的路径。本文除导论外，共分五个章节，主要内容为：第一章是法院附设仲裁历史嬗变。诉讼与ADR的互动缔造了法院附设仲裁，庞德会议则为其提供了蓬勃发展的契机。在联邦立法方面，迄今为止最重要的建树为1998年《替代性纠纷解决法》；在实践方面，法院附设仲裁走过了三个发展阶段：第一阶段是1970-1980年代，美国联邦法院首次试点附设仲裁；第二阶段是1990-2000年代，法院附设仲裁已发展成为法院案件管理实践的既定部分；第三阶段是2000年至今，附设仲裁成为广泛用于联邦和州级初审法院系统的替代性纠纷解决机制。第二章是美国法院附设仲裁学理分析。法院附设仲裁乃美国司法实用主义的智慧之作。实用主义司法乃法律实用主义的核心，其强调司法要关心后果，以及基于后果作出政策判断的倾向。实用主义法律进路对纠纷解决理论产生了深刻影响。将仲裁机制运用于法院管理中，既可节约法院资源，，又能于法院语境下分流案件、消解纠纷，以上亦是仲裁附设于法院的因由。法院附设仲裁诞生后，诸多争议亦随之而起，诸如应否阻抑重新审判、应否舍弃仲裁之终局性内核、会否输出“次等正义”，批评者对其正当性提出质疑，却也间接推动了法院附设仲裁的发展。第三章是美国法院附设仲裁运作规程。联邦地区法院和州级初审法院之所以得以建立和实施法院附设仲裁，是源于《ADR法》所赋予的权力或固有授权。法院附设仲裁程序依开启、展开和结束三个阶段渐次铺开，这是仲裁运作的动态过程。自愿性与强制性仲裁是美国法院附设仲裁的两种模式，自愿性仲裁模式包括“选择进入”与“选择退出”型模式，强制性仲裁模式又分为“强制进入”与“法官下令进入”。通过本论题的研究，笔者发现，实施自愿性仲裁的地区或州法院的案件量通常没有实施强制性仲裁法院的案件量大，工作负担亦明显轻于后者。美国联邦地区法院抑或州级初审法院之所以同时启用强制性仲裁与自愿性仲裁两种不同的程序模式，除深受法律实用主义影响外，更重要的是关注到了不同的州、不同的区域之间的差异，关注到了经济发展状况的不均衡，关注到了法院案件量负担的轻重，关注到了为合适的区域、合适的法院、合适的案件匹配合适的程序模式。第四章是美国法院附设仲裁实证考察。从实证的角度对比分析了法院附设仲裁在美国联邦法院启动之初与当下成熟阶段的运行状况和实施效果。研究发现，即使是法院附设仲裁试点时期的方案其设计亦相当完备，从总体目标到具体目标、从准入案件类型到具体仲裁流程都规划地十分详细具体；不仅对仲裁与诉讼的衔接进行了精准定位，还对仲裁员与法官之角色定位进行了厘清，甚至将司法人员从审前程序中撤离出来。法院附设仲裁并不是解决法院负担过重和当事人不满的灵丹妙药，但经过精心设计的仲裁方案的确能够较好地与诉讼制度相衔接，与法院系统中其他解纷机制协调运作，同时吸引精英律师、律师志愿者的奉献与支持。附设于法院的仲裁犹如调解与审判的“混血儿”，既是对审判的助益与补充，又别具一格地发挥着机制自身的潜能。第五章是美国法院附设仲裁对我国的启示。透过美国法院附设仲裁60余年的发展历程，可以看到许多值得引为镜鉴的制度精髓。法院不仅仅是民事纠纷处理的场域，亦不仅仅是仲裁程序的运作场域，它还承载了某种特殊使命，即提供诉讼与非诉讼解纷机制对接的宏大平台。这种对接的内涵亦是多层次的，其首先体现在组织机构的对接，第二层次的对接体现在工作流程的对接，第三层次的对接体现在仲裁结果的对接。法院在仲裁运行中起到的完全是一种程序上的作用而对案件的实体部分不做任何处理。美国法院附设仲裁自创建伊始即启用精英律师担任中立者，其中不乏律师志愿者无偿担任仲裁员，且一直延续至今。律师仲裁员是法院附设仲裁制度的核心，法官实际上起到的作用非常有限。
[Abstract]:The United States is the integration and conflict of the cultural characteristics of cultural diversity, is also the Americans to accept social conditions. Multivariate approach is the first arbitration court annexed ADR in the United States to create within the court system, and is known as the "father of judicial ADR." it is a different from the traditional arbitration and dispute settlement mechanisms. It originated in the court, running on the court, and solve in the lawsuit's shadow is committed to the dispute. The arbitration court has unique charm lies in its ruling is not binding and finality, but shows the judicial credibility; it subverts the traditional cognition of arbitration is not the negation of traditional arbitration court. The arbitration not only widens the application field of arbitration, the path for its "informal" solemn increased "access to justice".
In addition to the introduction, this article is divided into five chapters. The main contents are as follows:
The first chapter is the historical evolution of court annexed arbitration. ADR provides interactive litigation and arbitration court, Pound meeting is to provide development opportunities. In federal legislation, by far the most important contribution for the 1998 "alternative dispute resolution law; in practice, the court annexed arbitration through three development stages: the first stage is 1970-1980 years, the United States federal court for the first time the pilot with arbitration; second stage is 1990-2000 years, court annexed arbitration has become the court established part of case management practice; the third stage is from 2000 to now, has become widely used in the federal and state court system of alternative dispute resolution mechanism.
The second chapter is the theoretical analysis of the court annexed arbitration. The arbitration court annexed the U.S. judicial pragmatism wisdom. Pragmatism is the core of judicial legal pragmatism, the emphasis should be concerned about the judicial consequences, and based on the consequences of policy judgment. Pragmatism tendency to make law approach to solve the theory had a profound impact on dispute arbitration mechanism will use. In court management, not only can save resources and energy in the court, the court in the context of the cases, resolution of disputes, above is also attached to the court of arbitration for arbitration court. After the birth of a lot of controversy has arisen, such as whether the inhibition of re trial, should abandon the finality of the kernel, it will output "inferior justice, critics questioned its legitimacy, but also indirectly promoted the development of the arbitration court.
The third chapter is the court annexed arbitration rules. The Federal District Court and the state court of first instance is to establish and implement the court annexed arbitration, is derived from the The fourth chapter is the empirical study. The court annexed arbitration from the perspective of empirical comparative analysis of the operation status of the arbitration court in the United States federal court to start at the beginning with the current mature stage and the implementation effect. The study found that even the court annexed arbitration during the pilot period plan design is complete. Also, from the overall goal to specific goals from access to specific types of cases are planning to arbitration process are detailed; not only to the arbitration and litigation of convergence of precise positioning, also on the role of the arbitrator and judge the position of clarification, even the judicial officers evacuated from pretrial procedure. The arbitration court annexed and not solve the court burden and parties with a ready-made panacea but after careful design, the arbitration scheme can indeed effectively connected with the litigation system, in coordination with other dispute resolution mechanism in court system Meanwhile, the arbitration in court is like the "mixed blood" of mediation and trial. It is not only helpful to and supplement to the trial, but also plays a unique role in the potential of the mechanism itself.
The fifth chapter is the court annexed arbitration enlightenment to our country. Through the development process of the court annexed arbitration for more than 60 years, you can see many is as mirror system. The court is not only the essence of the field of civil disputes, also is not only the operating field of the arbitration proceedings, it also hosts a special mission. Which provides great platform for docking litigation and non litigation dispute resolution mechanism. The connotation of this docking is also multi-level, the first reflected in the organization of the docking, docking second levels reflected in the work flow of the docking, docking third levels reflected in the docking results. Up to the court of arbitration in the arbitration in the operation is complete a program on the role of the part of the entity of the case without any treatment. The court annexed arbitration since its inception that enabled elite lawyers as neutral, there are no volunteer lawyers As an arbitrator and continues to this day, the lawyer arbitrator is the core of the court's arbitration system, and the judge actually plays a very limited role.

【学位授予单位】：西南政法大学
【学位级别】：博士
【学位授予年份】：2013
【分类号】：D971.2;DD916

【参考文献】