仲裁裁决撤销制度的比较研究

发布时间：2018-08-04 18:34

【摘要】：商事仲裁作为一种制度化的司法外民商事纠纷解决方式,如今备受人们青睐的重要原因之一就在于仲裁一裁终局的特点。但是,这种纠纷解决方式自产生之日起,就面临与同样可以处理民商事争议的法院的关系问题。商事仲裁在本质上是当事人将业已发生或尚未发生的争议提交仲裁机构解决的一种契约性安排,正如没有绝对的契约自由一样,商事仲裁也不可能完全摆脱一国法院对其的司法干预,各国法院也不可能对这种准司法行为放任自流,不给予任何审查和监督。一旦仲裁裁决出现瑕疵,当事人同样也希望通过适当的司法监督机制对裁决进行异议。因此,仲裁一裁终局的特性与法院必要的司法监督之间历来便存在一种张力,如何协调二者之间的关系、保持二者的适度平衡,既发挥仲裁解决争议的优势,又不彻底排除法院对仲裁必要的司法监督,一直是仲裁理论界亘古不变的话题。在仲裁庭作出终局裁决以后,司法对仲裁的监督手段主要表现为撤销或不予执行仲裁裁决。其中,撤销系使已经生效的仲裁裁决自始丧失法律效力,是最严厉的司法监督措施。一些国家的立法和《联合国国际贸易法委员会国际商事仲裁示范法》明确规定申请撤销是对仲裁裁决惟一的追诉方式。这一规定代表和体现了各国支持仲裁的政策取向,符合现代商事仲裁实践的潮流,因而得到许多国家的响应和采用。但是,目前尚无专门规定裁决撤销制度的国际公约,导致各国在这一问题上的立法与实践存在较大差异。这种状况对国际和国内仲裁的良性发展显然不利。实践中,各国在撤销裁决领域的不同做法,诸如撤销裁决是否必然导致仲裁协议失效、是否完全否定裁决本身的效力以及已撤销的裁决能否继续执行等,为学界进行理论研究提供了丰富的素材。因此,从实践上总结各国的不同做法,从理论上厘清各种相关问题,对于规范仲裁裁决的撤销程序、维护仲裁裁决的终局性、促进商事仲裁的健康发展,具有十分重要的实践意义和理论价值。本文的主体部分共包括五章内容。第一章从探讨仲裁裁决的概念和类型、比较不同类型的撤销入手,界定相关术语,厘清研究范围；同时,对仲裁裁决撤销的法律程序,包括裁决撤销权的归属、撤销裁决之诉等以及设置仲裁裁决撤销制度的价值取向和意义进行了论述,为全文研究的展开作出必要的铺垫。第二章首先结合各国国内立法和国际条约,概述了仲裁裁决撤销的各种理由。然后分别从仲裁裁决本身的问题、仲裁管辖权问题、仲裁程序性缺陷、证据问题、争议事项的可仲裁性问题以及仲裁裁决是否违反公共秩序等几方面分析了撤销仲裁裁决的理由。本章结合一些国家的最新立法和实践中的案例,通过比较研究的方式论述了各国在立法中规定仲裁裁决的撤销理由时,应该遵循国际社会的普遍做法,将撤销的理由尽量限定在程序性理由。第三章探讨了仲裁裁决撤销的法律后果,主要从仲裁协议和裁决本身出发,分析裁决撤销后原仲裁协议的效力以及裁决本身的效力。对仲裁协议的效力问题,各国立法规定迥异,有些国家规定裁决被撤销后原仲裁协议即失效,有些则规定原协议继续有效,有些则将决定权留给了法院,还有些国家则规定了较为特殊的例外情形；裁决撤销对原裁决也会产生影响,一般来说,裁决被撤销具有域内和域外效力,少数承认与执行已撤销裁决的国家认为裁决的撤销不具有域外效力,这并非国际社会的普遍做法。本章还在学者总结的基础上分析了几类承认与执行已撤销裁决的理论基础模式,为下章论述裁决被撤销后的救济奠定基础。第四章论述了撤销仲裁裁决的救济问题。以撤销程序的推进为线索,论述了撤销程序中的救济,即重新仲裁的问题,也分析了裁决被撤销后可能救济的方式,包括向法院上诉、重新达成仲裁协议进行仲裁或向法院另行起诉；本章的最后,结合最新的案例重点分析了理论界热议的已撤销仲裁裁决的承认与执行问题,重点解析了此问题产生的根源并预测了已撤销裁决承认与执行的发展趋势。第五章回归中国裁决撤销制度本身,通过实证研究的方式,以仲裁机构近年来被法院撤销的裁决样本解构了中国仲裁裁决撤销制度存在的各种问题,运用大量案例和图表试图一窥我国仲裁裁决撤销的现状。本章的最后,文章分别就国内裁决和涉外裁决撤销的完善问题提出了可行的建议,指出就国内裁决而言,仲裁员在作出裁决时应注意到裁决在法律上的安全性,法院应改进仲裁观等；对于涉外仲裁裁决的撤销,应规范撤销理由、严格撤销程序、明确涉外裁决撤销的效力以及完善涉外裁决的救济等。
[Abstract]:As a kind of institutionalized judicial dispute settlement method, commercial arbitration is now one of the most important reasons for people's favor, which lies in the characteristics of arbitration at the end of the end. However, since the emergence of the dispute settlement, it is confronted with the relationship with the court which can also deal with the civil and commercial disputes. Commercial arbitration is in essence. It is a contractual arrangement for the parties to submit the disputes that have been or not occurred to the arbitration agency. As there is no absolute freedom of contract, commercial arbitration can not be completely free from judicial intervention by a state court. Once the arbitration award is defective, the parties also hope to disagree with the award through appropriate judicial supervision mechanism. Therefore, there is always a tension between the characteristics of the final arbitration and the necessary judicial supervision of the court, how to coordinate the relationship between the two parties, maintain the moderate balance of the two parties, and play an arbitration solution to the dispute. It has always been an invariable topic in the field of arbitration theory that the advantages of the negotiations do not completely exclude the necessary judicial supervision of the court on arbitration.
After the final decision is made by the arbitral tribunal, the main means of supervision by the judiciary are to revoke or not execute the arbitral award. In this case, the revocation department makes the arbitral award which has been in force from the beginning to lose its legal effect and is the most severe judicial supervision measure. The model law clearly stipulates that the application of revocation is the only way of recourse to the arbitral award. This provision represents and embodies the policy orientation of countries to support arbitration and is in line with the trend of modern commercial arbitration practice. Therefore, it has been responded to and adopted by many countries. However, there are no international conventions that specializes in determining the revocation system, which leads to various countries. There are great differences between legislation and Practice on this issue. This situation is obviously unfavorable to the benign development of international and domestic arbitration. In practice, different countries' different practices in the field of revocation, such as whether the revocation of the arbitral award will inevitably lead to the failure of the arbitration agreement, completely deny the effectiveness of the decision itself and whether the revoked adjudication will follow. It provides a rich material for the theoretical research of the academic community. Therefore, it is of great practical significance and theoretical price to sum up the different practices of various countries and to clarify various related issues from the practice and to standardize the procedures for the cancellation of arbitral awards, to maintain the finality of the arbitral awards and to promote the healthy development of commercial arbitration. Value.
The main part of this article includes five chapters.
The first chapter is to discuss the concept and type of arbitral award, to compare the different types of revocation, to define the relevant terms, to clarify the scope of the study, and to discuss the value orientation and significance of the legal procedure for the cancellation of the arbitral award, including the adjudication of the right of revocation of the adjudication, the revocation of the verdict, and the value orientation and significance of setting the system for the cancellation of the arbitral award. The full text of the research to make the necessary paving.
The second chapter, first of all, combined with domestic legislation and international treaties, summarized the various reasons for the cancellation of arbitral awards, and then analyzed the withdrawal from the question of the arbitration award itself, the question of arbitration jurisdiction, the procedural defects of arbitration, the issue of evidence, the arbitrability of the disputes and the violation of the public order in the arbitral award. Based on the latest legislation and practice in some countries, this chapter discusses the reasons for the revocation of arbitral awards in the legislature by comparative study, and should follow the general practice of the international community and limit the reasons for revocation to procedural reasons.
The third chapter discusses the legal consequences of the cancellation of the arbitral award, mainly from the arbitration agreement and the award itself, to analyze the validity of the original arbitration agreement after the revocation of the arbitral award and the validity of the award itself. The agreement continues to be valid, while some have left the decision to the court, and some countries have specified a more exceptional case; the revocation has an impact on the original award, and in general, the award has been revoked within and outside the territory, and the revocation of the verdict is not extraterritorial. This is not the universal practice of the international community. On the basis of the summary of the scholars, this chapter analyses the theoretical basis of several kinds of recognition and enforcement of the revoked verdict, which lays the foundation for the next chapter to discuss the relief after the adjudication has been revoked.
The fourth chapter discusses the relief of the revocation of the arbitral award. With the advance of the revocation procedure as a clue, the revocation of the revocation procedure is discussed, that is, the remedies of the revocation procedure, that is, the remedies of the arbitral award, and the possible ways of remedies after the adjudication has been revoked, including the appeal to the court, the re agreement of the arbitration agreement for arbitration or a separate prosecution in the court; the final chapter of this chapter, Combined with the latest cases, this paper focuses on the analysis of the recognition and implementation of the revoked arbitral award in the theoretical circle, focusing on the root cause of the problem and predicting the development trend of the recognition and implementation of the revoked adjudication.
The fifth chapter returns to the system of revocation of China's adjudication. Through the empirical study, it deconstructs the various problems existing in the system of revocation of China's arbitral award by the sample of the arbitral institution which has been revoked by the court in recent years, and tries to use a large number of cases and charts to see the current situation of the withdrawal of arbitration award in China. The perfect question of the adjudication and the revocation of foreign adjudication has put forward feasible suggestions, pointing out that in terms of domestic adjudication, the arbitrator should pay attention to the legal security of the arbitral award, the court should improve the view of arbitration, and so on. The revocation of the arbitral award should be revoked, the procedure should be revoked strictly, and the foreign adjudication is revoked. The effect and the relief of the foreign adjudication.
【学位授予单位】：武汉大学
【学位级别】：博士
【学位授予年份】：2013
【分类号】：D997.4

【参考文献】