论已撤销仲裁裁决的承认与执行

发布时间：2018-03-17 21:39

本文选题：已撤销仲裁裁决　切入点：承认与执行　出处：《湘潭大学》2012年硕士论文　论文类型：学位论文

【摘要】：仲裁作为国际贸易者之间纠纷解决的一种方式最初作为对诉讼弊端的回应受到了称赞。在国际贸易中，没有人会不看重仲裁的灵活性、保密性、适合性等这些特征。当事人选择仲裁解决纠纷不仅仅因上面所述特点以及可以自己选择仲裁员、确定仲裁程序等等，但最为重要的是，仲裁不会使任何一方当事人遭受由另外一方国籍国法院来确定当事人之间权利和义务的风险。然而，在实践中，一国法院对仲裁及其裁决仍保留了某种程度的监督权。就仲裁裁决而言，仲裁国法院有权依据自己本国的仲裁法规定撤销一项仲裁裁决，而承认与执行仲裁裁决国（简称承认与执行国）法院也可以根据其本国法或与其他国家缔结或参加的国际条约，承认与执行一项仲裁裁决。一个已被原属地国撤销的仲裁裁决在另一个管辖权下能否得到执行，是本文所关注的问题。对于这个论题，不同学者有不同观点。此论文不拘泥于分析或解读其他学者的观点，，仅在某个章节或段落简单介绍或提及。全文除引言和结语外，共分为三章。第一章是已撤销仲裁裁决承认与执行概述，分为三个小节：第一节介绍了何为“已撤销仲裁裁决”；第二节，已撤销仲裁裁决承认与执行的两种争论：支持与反对；第三节，已撤销仲裁裁决承认与执行的现状。第二章为已撤销仲裁裁决承认与执行的国际法与国内法依据。本文在该章的第一节和第二节分析解读了1958年《有关承认与执行外国仲裁裁决的纽约公约》（之后简称《纽约公约》）与1961年《有关国际商事仲裁的欧洲公约》（之后简称《欧洲公约》）。现如今有148个国家采用了《纽约公约》，《纽约公约》被认为是“广泛认可的最为成功的私国际法条约”。《欧洲公约》虽是一个区域性条约，却已有27个国家批准了该条约，其重要性是不言而喻。本文通过对这两个公约的分析发现其都在不同程度上为已撤销裁决承认与执行提供了依据。第三节阐述了有关国家执行裁决的国内依据，为下文国家实践的分析做铺垫。第三章是已撤销仲裁裁决承认与执行的实践，通过对法国、美国及其他国家自其开始承认与执行已撤销仲裁裁决案例以来对于本论题的态度变化进行阐述分析。该文的重点放在法国与美国的实践上，其他国家对已撤销裁决的承认与执行很大程度上受到这两个国家的影响，如西班牙。一个已撤销的仲裁裁决在某些情形中是能得到承认与执行的，暂时没有必要也难以杜绝这种情形的存在。
[Abstract]:Arbitration, as a form of dispute resolution among international traders, was initially praised as a response to the drawbacks of litigation. In international trade, no one values the flexibility and confidentiality of arbitration. Such characteristics as suitability, etc. Parties choose arbitration to resolve disputes not only because of the characteristics described above, but also because they can choose their own arbitrators, determine the arbitration procedure, etc., but most importantly, Arbitration does not expose either party to the risk of a court in the State of nationality of the other party determining the rights and obligations between the parties... however, in practice, A court of a State retains a certain degree of supervision over the arbitration and its award... in the case of an arbitral award, the court of the arbitral State has the power to set aside an arbitral award in accordance with the provisions of its own arbitration law, And the courts of the State of recognition and enforcement of arbitral awards (hereinafter referred to as the State of recognition and enforcement) may also, in accordance with their domestic law or international treaties concluded or acceded to with other States, Recognition and enforcement of an arbitral award. Whether an arbitral award which has been set aside by the original territorial State can be enforced under another jurisdiction is a matter of concern to this article. Different scholars have different points of view. This paper is not confined to analyzing or interpreting the views of other scholars, but simply introduces or refers to them in a section or paragraph. In addition to the introduction and conclusion, the full text is divided into three chapters. The first chapter is an overview of the recognition and enforcement of avoided arbitral awards, which is divided into three subsections: the first section introduces what is "setting aside an arbitral award"; Two types of arguments concerning recognition and enforcement of avoided arbitral awards: support and opposition; section III, Chapter two is the basis of international and domestic law for the recognition and enforcement of annulled arbitral awards. In the first and second sections of this chapter, the author analyzes and interprets the relevant recognition and enforcement in 1958. The New York Convention on Foreign Arbitral Awards (hereafter referred to as the New York Convention) and the European Convention on International Commercial Arbitration of 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the European Convention). The Convention is considered to be "the most successful private international law treaty widely recognized". Although the European Convention is a regional treaty, 27 countries have ratified the treaty, The importance of these two conventions is self-evident. It is found in this paper that both conventions provide, to varying degrees, a basis for the recognition and enforcement of setting aside awards. Section III sets out the domestic basis for the enforcement of awards by the States concerned. The third chapter is the practice of recognition and enforcement of annulled arbitral awards. The United States and other countries have analyzed the changes in attitude towards this topic since their cases of recognition and enforcement of annulled arbitral awards. The focus of this article is on the practice of France and the United States. Recognition and enforcement of setting aside awards by other States are largely affected by those two States, such as Spain... where a setting aside arbitral award is recognized and enforced in some cases, It is not necessary and difficult to put an end to this situation for the time being.
【学位授予单位】：湘潭大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2012
【分类号】：D997.4

【参考文献】