本文選題：公共政策 + 《紐約公約》�。� 參考：《北方工業(yè)大學(xué)》2017年碩士論文

【摘要】：隨著國(guó)際間經(jīng)濟(jì)貿(mào)易往來(lái)的日趨密切,中國(guó)也逐漸發(fā)展成為世界貿(mào)易和投資大國(guó),尤其是在我國(guó)政府提出的"一帶一路"發(fā)展戰(zhàn)略背景下,更多的中國(guó)企業(yè)選擇"走出去"全面參與國(guó)際貿(mào)易投資,外國(guó)企業(yè)也隨之"走進(jìn)來(lái)",一方面進(jìn)一步推動(dòng)了我國(guó)經(jīng)濟(jì)的發(fā)展,另一方面,國(guó)際貿(mào)易主體之間的糾紛和爭(zhēng)議也不可避免地隨之增加。在爭(zhēng)議解決方式的選擇上,商事仲裁因其獨(dú)特的糾紛解決機(jī)制,成為當(dāng)事人在國(guó)際貿(mào)易、投資中產(chǎn)生的各種爭(zhēng)議的首要選擇。仲裁裁決的承認(rèn)與執(zhí)行能夠保障當(dāng)事人權(quán)利義務(wù)關(guān)系的實(shí)現(xiàn)。在各國(guó)司法實(shí)踐中,法院都可以以仲裁裁決違背其本國(guó)的公共政策為由而拒絕承認(rèn)與執(zhí)行。而且在1958年《紐約公約》以及1985年《聯(lián)合國(guó)國(guó)際商事仲裁示范法》這兩個(gè)國(guó)際商事仲裁領(lǐng)域上最重要的公約中,均有將公共政策作為拒絕承認(rèn)與執(zhí)行抗辯理由的明確規(guī)定。然而,在司法實(shí)踐中各國(guó)法院對(duì)于公共政策的理解和運(yùn)用并不一致,這使得公共政策成為最有爭(zhēng)議的抗辯理由之一。但公共政策自身的模糊性,使得各國(guó)法院對(duì)于公共政策的理解和適用并不一致,這使得公共政策成為最有爭(zhēng)議的抗辯理由之一。因此,本文立足于仲裁裁決承認(rèn)與執(zhí)行領(lǐng)域的國(guó)際立法以及若干國(guó)內(nèi)立法中公共政策的規(guī)定,對(duì)有關(guān)公共政策的國(guó)內(nèi)外學(xué)術(shù)觀點(diǎn)進(jìn)行具體闡述和評(píng)論,厘清相關(guān)理論學(xué)說(shuō),另外結(jié)合國(guó)內(nèi)外典型案例,認(rèn)為當(dāng)前國(guó)際趨勢(shì)是狹義解釋并審慎適用公共政策,同時(shí)將公共政策進(jìn)行區(qū)分,認(rèn)為只有在國(guó)際商事仲裁裁決違反國(guó)際公共政策時(shí)才可予以拒絕承認(rèn)與執(zhí)行。指出我國(guó)應(yīng)從立法和司法方面入手,同時(shí)參考國(guó)際先進(jìn)做法,進(jìn)而完善公共政策在我國(guó)實(shí)踐中的應(yīng)用。
[Abstract]:With the international economic and trade exchanges becoming closer and closer, China has gradually developed into a world trade and investment power, especially in the context of the "Belt and Road" development strategy put forward by our government. More Chinese enterprises choose to "go out" to participate in international trade and investment, and foreign enterprises also "step in," which on the one hand further promotes the development of China's economy, and on the other hand, The disputes and disputes among international trade subjects inevitably increase. In the choice of dispute settlement, commercial arbitration, because of its unique dispute settlement mechanism, has become the first choice of the parties in international trade and investment. The recognition and enforcement of arbitral awards can guarantee the realization of the relationship between the rights and obligations of the parties. In the judicial practice of various countries, courts can refuse to recognize and enforce arbitral awards on the grounds that they are contrary to their own public policy. Moreover, in the 1958 New York Convention and the 1985 United Nations Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration, which are the two most important conventions in the field of international commercial arbitration, there is a clear stipulation that public policy is regarded as the defense of refusal to recognize and enforce. However, in judicial practice, the courts of various countries do not understand and apply public policy consistently, which makes public policy one of the most controversial defences. However, the ambiguity of public policy makes the understanding and application of public policy inconsistent, which makes public policy one of the most controversial defences. Therefore, based on the international legislation in the field of recognition and enforcement of arbitral awards and the provisions of public policy in some domestic legislation, this paper elaborates and comments on the domestic and foreign academic views on public policy, and clarifies the relevant theories. In addition, combining with typical cases at home and abroad, the author thinks that the current international trend is to interpret and apply public policies in a narrow sense and carefully, and at the same time to distinguish public policies. Only if the international commercial arbitration award violates international public policy can it be refused recognition and enforcement. It is pointed out that our country should start with legislation and judicature, and at the same time refer to international advanced practices, and then perfect the application of public policy in our country's practice.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：北方工業(yè)大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2017
【分類號(hào)】：D997.4

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 郭浩;;我國(guó)國(guó)際商事仲裁裁決的司法審查中公共政策運(yùn)用的實(shí)證研究[J];北京仲裁;2016年01期

2 徐春龍;李立菲;;《紐約公約》中“公共政策”的理解與適用——以最高人民法院批復(fù)的8起案件為樣本[J];中國(guó)海商法研究;2014年04期

3 何其生;;國(guó)際商事仲裁司法審查中的公共政策[J];中國(guó)社會(huì)科學(xué);2014年07期

4 傅攀峰;;論國(guó)際商事仲裁裁決的既判力[J];武大國(guó)際法評(píng)論;2013年01期

5 趙維東;;從《紐約公約》在亞洲國(guó)家的實(shí)施看國(guó)際商事仲裁中的公共秩序[J];仲裁研究;2011年03期

6 王承志;李劍強(qiáng);;內(nèi)地仲裁裁決在香港法院執(zhí)行中的公共政策問(wèn)題[J];仲裁研究;2011年02期

7 李迅;;中國(guó)拒絕承認(rèn)與執(zhí)行外國(guó)仲裁裁決實(shí)務(wù)研究[J];商事仲裁;2010年02期

8 楊玲;;國(guó)際商事仲裁公共政策司法界定的實(shí)踐與發(fā)展[J];政治與法律;2010年11期

9 萬(wàn)鄂湘;夏曉紅;;中國(guó)法院不予承認(rèn)及執(zhí)行某些外國(guó)仲裁裁決的原因——《紐約公約》相關(guān)案例分析[J];武大國(guó)際法評(píng)論;2010年02期

10 詹慧娟;;《紐約公約》第5條中公共政策條款與正當(dāng)程序條款的適用[J];北京仲裁;2009年02期

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前3條

1 熊守毅;論國(guó)際商事仲裁裁決承認(rèn)與執(zhí)行中的公共政策[D];廣西大學(xué);2014年

2 張凡;論美國(guó)仲裁中的“顯然漠視法律規(guī)則”[D];上海師范大學(xué);2014年

3 陳芳芳;國(guó)際商事仲裁裁決的承認(rèn)與執(zhí)行中的公共政策[D];復(fù)旦大學(xué);2010年

，

本文編號(hào)：2046223