论恶意仲裁之撤回仲裁申请权利的滥用
发布时间：2018-10-11 19:25
【摘要】：仲裁作为一种解决争议的方式有着悠久的历史，自欧洲中世纪晚期仲裁逐渐制度化，到1904年清政府颁行《商会简明章程》正式将商事仲裁权赋予商会，无论在西方还是东方，，仲裁相对诉讼更加快捷高效解决争议的特点贯穿始终。这种高效率的“一裁终局”形式较之诉讼，对程序上的公平性有着更高的要求。然而我国的相关法律和仲裁规则在或明示或默示地赋予了仲裁申请人撤回仲裁申请的权利时，并没有详细规定这种权利的使用限制，因此在实务中就出现了有失公平的情况，有申请人滥用此权利为自己谋取不正当利益，而仲裁委员会和仲裁庭又碍于法规的不完善和一些其他因素掣肘，很难在问题出现时有所作为。这样不仅置仲裁案件的被申请人于不公平的地位，同时也有损仲裁程序解决争议的效率，因此本文研究的目的就是探究规制这种恶意仲裁的办法，及时制止类似情况的继续发生。 笔者所采用的主要研究方法分别是：调查法，利用实习的机会深入仲裁机构有目的、有计划地搜集研究对象的相关材料；比较法，对比国外相关先进立法为完善国内仲裁法律和仲裁规则建言献策；文献分析法，从大量的阅读中，发现问题所在，为笔者的研究指明方向。研究本文的意义在于三点：一是促进仲裁研究领域对程序问题的重视；二是从仲裁实务中发现问题再回到仲裁实务中解决问题；三是为国内仲裁立法和仲裁规则的完善提供建议。 本文是遵循如下逻辑思路对恶意仲裁问题进行研究的：首先举例说明何为恶意仲裁，并对其概念进行界定；其次通过分析当事人撤回仲裁申请的不同方式区分该权利的正当行使与滥用，并阐明申请人这种规避法律的行为既损害了被申请人的合法权益，又造成了优质宝贵的仲裁资源的浪费，同时最重要的是破坏了仲裁程序的公平，因而必须采取措施进行规制；最后从比较法的角度分别借鉴我国台湾地区的民事诉讼规则、《日本国仲裁法》以及《美国联邦民事诉讼规则》中的相关规定，吸取各家立法长处，综合考量之后提出一套遏制恶意仲裁的方案，即不仅要在仲裁法中明确规定当事人享有撤回仲裁申请的权利，而且还要在规制恶意仲裁方面明确仲裁庭准许或不予准许当事人撤回仲裁申请的条件，提高仲裁机构再次受理已经申请人撤回案件的门槛，同时为申请人违规撤回仲裁申请设定更高的代价。
[Abstract]:Arbitration as a way of settling disputes has a long history. From the late Middle Ages to the gradual institutionalization of arbitration in Europe, to the promulgation of the Concise Charter of the Chamber of Commerce by the Qing government in 1904, the right of commercial arbitration was formally granted to the Chamber of Commerce, whether in the West or in the East. Arbitration is more efficient than litigation to resolve disputes throughout the characteristics. This kind of high-efficiency "one-cut final" form has higher requirements on procedural fairness than litigation. However, the relevant laws and arbitration rules of our country have given the right of withdrawal of arbitration application to the applicant of arbitration explicitly or implicitly, and have not stipulated the restriction of the use of this right in detail. Therefore, in practice, there has been an unfair situation. Some applicants abuse this right to seek improper interests for themselves, and the arbitration commission and arbitral tribunal are unable to do anything when the problem arises due to the imperfection of the law and some other factors. In this way, not only the respondent of the arbitration case is placed in an unfair position, but also the efficiency of the arbitration procedure in resolving disputes is impaired. Therefore, the purpose of this paper is to explore the method of regulating this malicious arbitration. Stop the recurrence of similar situations in time. The main research methods adopted by the author are as follows: investigation method, using the practice opportunity to go deep into the arbitration institution to collect the relevant materials of the object of study in a planned way; Compared with the relevant foreign advanced legislation to improve the domestic arbitration law and arbitration rules, literature analysis, from a large number of reading, found the problem, for the author to point out the direction of the study. The significance of this study lies in three aspects: first, to promote the attention to the procedure in the field of arbitration research, second, to find problems from the practice of arbitration and then to solve the problems in the practice of arbitration; Third, to provide suggestions for the perfection of domestic arbitration legislation and arbitration rules. This paper follows the following logic to study the malicious arbitration: first of all, illustrate what is malicious arbitration, and define its concept; Secondly, by analyzing the different ways in which the parties withdraw the arbitration application, the author distinguishes the legitimate exercise and abuse of the right, and clarifies that the behavior of evading the law by the applicant not only damages the legitimate rights and interests of the respondent, It also causes the waste of high quality and precious arbitration resources, and the most important thing is to destroy the fairness of the arbitration procedure, so it is necessary to take measures to regulate the arbitration procedure. Finally, from the perspective of comparative law, we draw lessons from the relevant provisions of the rules of civil action in Taiwan, the Arbitration Law of Japan and the rules of Federal Civil procedure of the United States of America, and draw on the advantages of various legislations. After comprehensive consideration, it proposes a plan to deter malicious arbitration, that is, not only to specify in the arbitration law that the parties have the right to withdraw their application for arbitration, Moreover, in the aspect of regulating malicious arbitration, the conditions under which the arbitration tribunal permits or does not permit the parties to withdraw their arbitration applications should be made clear, so as to raise the threshold for arbitration institutions to accept the withdrawal of cases by the applicants again. At the same time, it sets a higher price for the applicant to withdraw the arbitration application illegally.
【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
本文编号：2264979
[Abstract]:Arbitration as a way of settling disputes has a long history. From the late Middle Ages to the gradual institutionalization of arbitration in Europe, to the promulgation of the Concise Charter of the Chamber of Commerce by the Qing government in 1904, the right of commercial arbitration was formally granted to the Chamber of Commerce, whether in the West or in the East. Arbitration is more efficient than litigation to resolve disputes throughout the characteristics. This kind of high-efficiency "one-cut final" form has higher requirements on procedural fairness than litigation. However, the relevant laws and arbitration rules of our country have given the right of withdrawal of arbitration application to the applicant of arbitration explicitly or implicitly, and have not stipulated the restriction of the use of this right in detail. Therefore, in practice, there has been an unfair situation. Some applicants abuse this right to seek improper interests for themselves, and the arbitration commission and arbitral tribunal are unable to do anything when the problem arises due to the imperfection of the law and some other factors. In this way, not only the respondent of the arbitration case is placed in an unfair position, but also the efficiency of the arbitration procedure in resolving disputes is impaired. Therefore, the purpose of this paper is to explore the method of regulating this malicious arbitration. Stop the recurrence of similar situations in time. The main research methods adopted by the author are as follows: investigation method, using the practice opportunity to go deep into the arbitration institution to collect the relevant materials of the object of study in a planned way; Compared with the relevant foreign advanced legislation to improve the domestic arbitration law and arbitration rules, literature analysis, from a large number of reading, found the problem, for the author to point out the direction of the study. The significance of this study lies in three aspects: first, to promote the attention to the procedure in the field of arbitration research, second, to find problems from the practice of arbitration and then to solve the problems in the practice of arbitration; Third, to provide suggestions for the perfection of domestic arbitration legislation and arbitration rules. This paper follows the following logic to study the malicious arbitration: first of all, illustrate what is malicious arbitration, and define its concept; Secondly, by analyzing the different ways in which the parties withdraw the arbitration application, the author distinguishes the legitimate exercise and abuse of the right, and clarifies that the behavior of evading the law by the applicant not only damages the legitimate rights and interests of the respondent, It also causes the waste of high quality and precious arbitration resources, and the most important thing is to destroy the fairness of the arbitration procedure, so it is necessary to take measures to regulate the arbitration procedure. Finally, from the perspective of comparative law, we draw lessons from the relevant provisions of the rules of civil action in Taiwan, the Arbitration Law of Japan and the rules of Federal Civil procedure of the United States of America, and draw on the advantages of various legislations. After comprehensive consideration, it proposes a plan to deter malicious arbitration, that is, not only to specify in the arbitration law that the parties have the right to withdraw their application for arbitration, Moreover, in the aspect of regulating malicious arbitration, the conditions under which the arbitration tribunal permits or does not permit the parties to withdraw their arbitration applications should be made clear, so as to raise the threshold for arbitration institutions to accept the withdrawal of cases by the applicants again. At the same time, it sets a higher price for the applicant to withdraw the arbitration application illegally.
【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】
相关期刊论文 前10条
1 顾维遐;;我们信赖仲裁吗?——关于中国仲裁研究的英文文献综述[J];北京仲裁;2010年02期
2 张泽平;国际商事仲裁中的责任制度探析[J];当代法学;2001年08期
3 丁伟;;一事不再理:仲裁制度中的“阿喀琉斯之踵”[J];东方法学;2011年01期
4 顾维遐;;香港与内地仲裁裁决司法审查制度的借鉴和融合[J];法学家;2009年04期
5 张旭;关于“一事不再理”原则的再思考[J];法学评论;2003年04期
6 王利明;海峡两岸仲裁立法的比较研究[J];法学评论;2004年01期
7 谭兵;;试论我国的仲裁环境及其优化[J];法学评论;2006年01期
8 梁智刚;徐进静;;论仲裁申请的撤回及其相关问题[J];法制与社会;2008年03期
9 赵钢;略论仲裁申请人的撤案申请权[J];法学评论;2000年06期
10 赵秀文;;论仲裁规则的性质及其与仲裁法之间的关系[J];河北法学;2008年06期
本文编号：2264979
本文链接：https://www.wllwen.com/falvlunwen/susongfa/2264979.html
