比较法视野下的国际商事仲裁中的反垄断争议解决

发布时间：2018-06-18 00:46

本文选题：反垄断争议 + 国际商事仲裁　；参考：《华东政法大学》2012年硕士论文

【摘要】：反垄断争议是否具有可仲裁性以及如何承认和执行涉及反垄断争议的国际商事仲裁裁决这两个问题随着国际商事仲裁和反垄断法的日益普及而愈加受到理论界和法律实务界的关注。美国作为反垄断法领域的先驱者，以Mitsubishi Motors V. Soler Chrysler Plymouth案为发端，首次肯定了反垄断争议的可仲裁性。无独有偶，欧盟虽未明确肯定其承认反垄断争议的可仲裁性，但从其判决中也可看出对于该问题欧盟持有肯定的意见。在肯定反垄断争议具有可仲裁性的前提之下，美国和欧盟对于该类裁决如何进行承认和执行阶段的审查也建立了具有各自特色的审查机制，既保证了反垄断争议通过国际商事仲裁解决的可行性，也保证了反垄断法的有效实施。我国对于反垄断争议是否具有可仲裁性以及涉及反垄断争议的国际商事仲裁裁决在承认和执行阶段如何进行审查还没有相关的立法和案例。鉴于以欧美为先导的国际社会逐步承认反垄断争议具有可仲裁性的趋势，我国很有必要在理论界和实务界开展这方面的研究，以明确我国对于反垄断争议可仲裁性的态度并制定符合我国国情的涉及反垄断争议的国际商事仲裁裁决审查机制。本文将就反垄断争议的可仲裁性和如何对涉及反垄断争议的国际商事仲裁裁决进行审查展开。通过比较美国和欧盟较为成熟的观点和做法，为我国明确反垄断争议可仲裁性的态度和制定对该类裁决的审查机制提出建议。具体而言，本文将分为四个部分：第一部分将介绍国际商事仲裁中反垄断争议的现状，集中简介美国和欧盟对于反垄断争议的可仲裁性和审查涉及反垄断争议的国际商事仲裁裁决的历史演变。同时，深入分析国际商事仲裁和反垄断法的价值取向和两者之间的价值冲突，以此说明为什么学界和实务界会对通过国际商事仲裁方式解决反垄断争议存在争议。第二部分将深入论述反垄断争议的可仲裁性问题，并结合美国和欧盟就该问题裁决的案例说明应当承认反垄断争议具有可仲裁性的合理性和合法性。第三部分将主要论述涉及反垄断争议的国际商事仲裁裁决在承认和执行阶段的审查问题。从美国和欧盟的案例和实践为切入点，深入分析对该类仲裁裁决审查的必要性。第四部分将针对中国的国情并结合美国和欧盟的实践经验，提出我国应当承认反垄断争议可仲裁性并建立对涉及反垄断争议的国际商事仲裁裁决实质性审查的机制。
[Abstract]:With the increasing popularity of international commercial arbitration and antitrust law, the issues of whether antitrust disputes are arbitrable and how to recognize and enforce international commercial arbitration awards involving antitrust disputes have become more and more popular among the theorists and scholars. The concern of the legal profession. As a pioneer in antitrust law, the United States, starting with the Mitsubishi Motors v. Soler Chrysler Plymouth case, affirmed for the first time the arbitrability of antitrust disputes. Coincidentally, although the EU has not explicitly affirmed the arbitrability of its recognition of antitrust disputes, it can also be seen from its judgment that the EU holds a positive opinion on this issue. While affirming the arbitrability of antitrust disputes, the United States and the European Union have also established a review mechanism with their own characteristics on how such awards are reviewed at the recognition and enforcement stages, It not only ensures the feasibility of solving antitrust disputes through international commercial arbitration, but also ensures the effective implementation of anti-monopoly law. There are no relevant legislation and cases on whether antitrust disputes have arbitrability or not and how to review international commercial arbitration awards involving antitrust disputes in the stage of recognition and enforcement. In view of the fact that the international community, led by Europe and the United States, has gradually recognized the trend of arbitrability in antitrust disputes, it is necessary for our country to carry out such research in the theoretical and practical circles. In order to clarify China's attitude towards the arbitrability of antitrust disputes and to formulate a review mechanism of international commercial arbitration awards concerning antitrust disputes in accordance with the national conditions of our country. This paper focuses on the arbitrability of antitrust disputes and how to review international commercial arbitration awards involving antitrust disputes. By comparing the more mature viewpoints and practices of the United States and the European Union, some suggestions are put forward for our country to clarify the arbitrability of antitrust disputes and to formulate a review mechanism for this kind of award. Specifically, this paper will be divided into four parts: the first part will introduce the current situation of antitrust disputes in international commercial arbitration. This paper focuses on the arbitrability of antitrust disputes between the United States and the European Union and the historical evolution of the review of international commercial arbitration awards involving antitrust disputes. At the same time, it deeply analyzes the value orientation of international commercial arbitration and antimonopoly law and the value conflict between them, so as to explain why the academic and practical circles have disputes over the settlement of antitrust disputes through international commercial arbitration. In the second part, the arbitrability of antitrust disputes is discussed in depth, and combined with the cases of the United States and the European Union, it should be recognized that the antitrust disputes have the reasonableness and legality of arbitrability. The third part mainly discusses the examination of the recognition and enforcement of international commercial arbitration awards involving antitrust disputes. From the case and practice of the United States and the European Union, the necessity of reviewing the arbitration award is analyzed in depth. In the fourth part, according to the situation of China and the practical experience of the United States and the European Union, the author points out that China should recognize the arbitrability of antitrust disputes and establish a mechanism for the substantive review of international commercial arbitration awards involving antitrust disputes.
【学位授予单位】：华东政法大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2012
【分类号】：D997.4

【参考文献】