论反垄断纠纷可仲裁性的司法考量——兼评某垄断纠纷管辖权异议案

发布时间：2018-06-20 13:53

本文选题：反垄断纠纷 + 可仲裁性　；参考：《法律适用》2017年07期

【摘要】：反垄断法被称为"经济宪法",带有较强公法色彩和公共利益价值取向,因此,传统观点长期认为反垄断纠纷应当由法院专属管辖而排除仲裁解决。但是伴随着经济全球化和国际商事仲裁的发展,许多国家立法和司法实践中也逐步承认反垄断纠纷的可仲裁性。而我国最近一个关于垄断纠纷管辖权异议的案件,将反垄断纠纷可仲裁性的司法审查问题拉入了公众视野,法院后续在审查此类纠纷可仲裁性时从何种角度分析、普遍需要考量哪些因素,也成为理论和实践应当关注的问题。在分析案件的基础上,结合别国立法和司法实践经验,我国司法审查至少应当从法律因素、纠纷具体类型定性、公共政策等角度考量反垄断纠纷的可仲裁性,从而更加全面、客观地分析具体个案。
[Abstract]:Anti-monopoly law is called "economic constitution", with strong public law color and value orientation of public interest. Therefore, the traditional view has long held that antitrust disputes should be solved by exclusive jurisdiction of the court and exclusive arbitration. However, with the development of economic globalization and international commercial arbitration, many countries have gradually recognized the arbitrability of antitrust disputes in their legislation and judicial practice. However, a recent case concerning the jurisdiction objection of monopoly disputes in China has drawn the issue of judicial review of arbitrability of antitrust disputes into the public eye. What angle does the court analyze when examining the arbitrability of such disputes? The general need to consider which factors, as well as the theory and practice should be concerned about. On the basis of analyzing cases and combining the legislative and judicial practice experience of other countries, our judicial review should at least consider the arbitrability of antitrust disputes from the perspectives of legal factors, specific types of disputes, public policies, and so on, so as to be more comprehensive. Objective analysis of specific cases.
【作者单位】：武汉大学竞争法与竞争政策研究中心;武汉大学法学院;
【基金】：国家社会科学基金项目《竞争性国有企业改革路径的法律困境和出路》(批准号12BF088) 最高人民法院2016年度司法研究重大课题《供给侧改革背景下相关司法对策研究》阶段性成果国家2011计划司法文明协同创新项目部分研究成果
【分类号】：D922.294

【相似文献】