我国仲裁裁决司法审查实证研究

发布时间：2018-03-10 08:27

本文选题：仲裁裁决　切入点：司法审查　出处：《吉林大学》2014年硕士论文　论文类型：学位论文

【摘要】：作为与诉讼并行的纠纷解决方式，仲裁以其快捷性、经济性、保密性等优点飞速发展。世界各国法院均对仲裁裁决进行司法审查。之前的学术研究对我国现行的仲裁裁决司法审查从理论上提出了各种完善的建议，但缺乏从司法实践角度出发的实证主义研究。作为一名法律实务工作者，本文重点对我国法院从事司法审查的困境进行研究，以评价现行司法审查的得失，进而提出完善的建议。本文第一部分对我国仲裁裁决司法审查的立法发展和背景进行研究，认为：一、我国对仲裁裁决实行撤销和不予执行的双重审查模式。二、我国对仲裁裁决实行内外有别的双轨制审查模式，对国内仲裁裁决审查程序和部分实体，对涉外仲裁裁决只审查程序。三、我国的司法审查立法是有其特殊的历史背景和国情，具有滞后性，最高人民法院针对司法审查制度的漏洞作出了有益的完善和补充。本文第二部分对深圳市中级人民法院审查的撤销和不予执行仲裁裁决案例和审查中发现的问题进行了实证主义研究，认为我国的仲裁裁决司法审查存在如下困境：1、当事人滥用对仲裁裁决的撤销和不予执行双重审查，严重拖延仲裁裁决的执行程序。2、我国立法区分国内仲裁与涉外仲裁，但对仲裁涉外性的认定缺乏统一标准，，《民事诉讼法》和《仲裁法》规定的认定标准不一致，在司法实践中造成混乱。3、我国立法对国内仲裁裁决进行“裁决所根据的证据是伪造的”和“对方当事人隐瞒了足以影响公正裁决的证据”的实体审查，但缺乏统一的认定标准，在司法实践中认定困难。4、仲裁裁决司法审查案例反映出我国对仲裁员的监管存在严重不足。本文第三部分对我国仲裁裁决司法审查提出如下完善建议：一、完善双重审查模式，撤销仲裁裁决制度和不予执行仲裁裁决制度各有其功用和价值，都应保留；但两种制度的审查标准已经一致，对同一仲裁裁决，应限制当事人只能选择申请进行一种审查；申请撤销仲裁裁决的期限应缩短为当事人收到仲裁裁决后3个月内。二、应取消国内仲裁裁决和涉外仲裁裁决的双轨制审查模式，均只审查程序，但当事人协议同意时可以进行全面审查。三、重新仲裁制度对于发挥仲裁的作用有其积极意义，应扩大重新仲裁制度的适用范围。四、为保护当事人的权利，对于法院裁定撤销或者不予执行仲裁裁决的案件应允许当事人上诉。五、应尽快成立中国仲裁协会，履行行业监督职责，完善仲裁员的监督机制。
[Abstract]:As a method of dispute settlement parallel to litigation, arbitration is characterized by its rapidity and economy. The advantages of confidentiality have developed rapidly. Courts all over the world have carried out judicial review of arbitral awards. Previous academic studies have put forward various theoretical suggestions for the judicial review of current arbitral awards in China. However, there is a lack of positivism from the point of view of judicial practice. As a legal practitioner, this paper focuses on the plight of judicial review in Chinese courts in order to evaluate the gains and losses of the current judicial review. Then put forward the perfect suggestion. The first part of this paper studies the legislative development and background of judicial review of arbitral awards in China. Our country carries out the two-track system examination mode of the arbitration award. For the domestic arbitration award review procedure and some entities, the foreign arbitration award only reviews the procedure. Third, the judicial review legislation of our country has its special historical background and national conditions. With lag, the Supreme people's Court has made a beneficial improvement and supplement to the loopholes of judicial review system. In the second part of this paper, the case of annulment and non-enforcement of arbitration award examined by Shenzhen Intermediate people's Court and the problems found in the examination are studied empirically. The author thinks that the judicial review of arbitration award in our country has the following difficulties: 1, the parties abuse the double examination of annulment and non-enforcement of the arbitral award, seriously delay the enforcement procedure of the arbitral award, and the legislation of our country distinguishes the domestic arbitration from the foreign arbitration. However, there is a lack of uniform standards for the determination of the foreign-related nature of arbitration, and the standards stipulated in the Civil procedure Law and the Arbitration Law are inconsistent. As a result of confusion in judicial practice, the legislation of our country carries on the entity examination of "the evidence on which the award is based on forgery" and "the other party conceals the evidence sufficient to affect the fair award", but there is no uniform standard of determination. In judicial practice, it is difficult to identify the arbitrators. 4. The judicial review cases of arbitral awards reflect the serious deficiencies in the supervision of arbitrators in our country. The third part of this paper puts forward the following suggestions for the judicial review of arbitration awards in China: first, to improve the dual review model, annulment of arbitration awards system and non-enforcement of arbitration awards system have their respective functions and values, should be retained; However, the examination standards of the two systems have been identical. For the same arbitral award, the parties shall be restricted from choosing to apply for one kind of examination; the time limit for applying for setting aside the arbitral award shall be shortened to three months after the parties receive the arbitral award. The two-track review model of domestic arbitration awards and foreign arbitration awards should be abolished, and only the procedures should be reviewed, but when the parties agree by agreement, they can conduct a comprehensive review. Third, the re-arbitration system has its positive significance for giving full play to the role of arbitration. The scope of application of the re-arbitration system should be expanded. (4) in order to protect the rights of the parties, in order to protect the rights of the parties, in order to protect the rights of the parties, the parties shall be allowed to appeal in cases where the court decides to set aside or not enforce the arbitral award. To perform industry supervision duties and improve the supervisory mechanism of arbitrators.
【学位授予单位】：吉林大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2014
【分类号】：D925.7

【参考文献】