尼泊爾仲裁程序面臨的主要阻礙就是司法干預(yù)。尼泊爾最高法院通過曲解法律規(guī)定,獲得對(duì)仲裁裁決的多重管轄權(quán)。根據(jù)尼泊爾《仲裁法》的規(guī)定,當(dāng)事人獲得仲裁裁決后,不滿仲裁裁決的一方可以到高等法院提出異議,高等法院可以在兩種情形下宣布仲裁裁決無(wú)效。第一個(gè)是,如果仲裁員解決的爭(zhēng)議無(wú)法通過尼泊爾法律的仲裁解決。第二種情形是,如果仲裁員做出的裁決有損于公共利益或者公共政策。除了這些理由之外,尼泊爾法律沒有預(yù)見法院對(duì)仲裁裁決行使管轄權(quán)的其他任何條件。然而,盡管缺乏明確的法律規(guī)定,最高法院也受理了不同的管轄權(quán),即上訴和令狀。這樣就導(dǎo)致這些裁決需要通過司法程序解決,有時(shí)候甚至需要將近20年的時(shí)間。商事仲裁的優(yōu)勢(shì)在于其快速、非正式、有專業(yè)裁判團(tuán)和能夠保護(hù)商業(yè)秘密。但是,過度的司法干預(yù)會(huì)破壞仲裁精神。 

【文章來源】：華東政法大學(xué)上海市

【文章頁(yè)數(shù)】：69 頁(yè)

【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士

【文章目錄】：
Abstract
中文摘要
Abbreviations
Chapter One:General Introduction
    1.1 Background of the Research
        1.1.1 Arbitration Regimes in Nepal
        1.1.2 Judicial Review of the Arbitral Award
        1.1.3 Judicial Intervention over the Arbitral Award
    1.2 Research Questions
    1.3 Significance of Research
    1.4 Methodology of Research
    1.5 Literature Review
    1.6 Limitation of Research
    1.7 Structure of the Research
Chapter Two:Legal Framework for the Jurisdiction of the Court on Arbitral Awards
    2.1 Domestic Laws
        2.1.1 Constitution of Nepal
        2.1.2 Administration of Justice Act
        2.1.3 Arbitration Act of Nepal
    2.2 International Laws
        2.2.1 New York Convention1958,Article V
        2.2.2 UNCITRAL Model Law
Chapter Three:Supreme Court’s intervention Over Arbitral Awards:Case Analysis
    3.1 Appeal to the Supreme Court:Jurisdiction without Laws
        3.1.1 Case:Vijaya Construction Company v.Central Bank of Nepal
        3.1.2 Analysis
    3.2 Writ Petition:Out of Frying Pan into the Fire
        3.2.1 Case:Agriculture Inputs Corporation(AIC)v.Sumit Prakash Asia Pvt.Ltd. (SPA)
        3.2.2 Analysis
        3.2.3 Case:Nepal Airlines Cooperation v.Haarati Travels and Tours
        3.2.4 Analysis
    3.3 Supreme Court’s Review of its own Previous Judgments:Example of Extreme Intervention
        3.3.1 Case:Ministry of Finance Nepal v.Damodar Ropeways and Construction Company
        3.3.2 Analysis
    3.4 Two Round Review by the Supreme Court and the High Court:Travel on the Vicious Cycle
        3.4.1 Case Analysis:Bridge Line Corporation v.Agricultural Inputs Corporation
    3.5 Consequences of Supreme Court’s Intervention over Arbitral Awards
        3.5.1 Degrade the Principle of Finality
        3.5.2 Risky for Defeating the Whole Arbitration Process
Chapter Four:Recommendations for Improvement
    4.1 Supreme Court Can Overrule Existing Precedent by Higher Bench
    4.2 Legislative Can amend laws that can limit the Supreme Court’s Intervention
Chapter Five:Conclusion
Bibliography
Acknowledgement



本文編號(hào)：3441809