論國際商事仲裁的“非當?shù)鼗壁厔?/H1>
發(fā)布時間：2018-06-22 21:08
本文選題：國際商事仲裁 + 非當?shù)鼗?/strong> ； 參考：《上海師范大學(xué)》2017年碩士論文
【摘要】：在二十世紀五、六十年代,一個新的理論——“非當?shù)鼗崩碚摫惶岢?它是仲裁回歸本原、日益走向國際化和非當?shù)鼗谋厝划a(chǎn)物和重要的理論基礎(chǔ)。與傳統(tǒng)國際商事仲裁制度不同,“非當?shù)鼗崩碚撦^大程度地尊重當事人和仲裁庭的自治權(quán),突破了仲裁地法的絕對適用的限制,弱化法院對國際商事仲裁的司法監(jiān)督,對被撤銷的裁決有權(quán)依照本國法律決定是否給予執(zhí)行。國際商事仲裁在總體上已形成“非當?shù)鼗壁厔?雖然該趨勢目前處于有限狀態(tài),但它不會消亡反而前景更加光明。文章主體第一部分闡釋了國際商事仲裁“非當?shù)鼗壁厔莸漠a(chǎn)生和成因。從三個經(jīng)典案例入手,考察國際商事仲裁“非當?shù)鼗崩碚摦a(chǎn)生的時代背景,探究該理論的具體表現(xiàn),并論述“非當?shù)鼗壁厔莸某梢?為文章主題的詳細展開起到立論的作用。文章主體第二部分闡釋了國際商事仲裁仲裁“非當?shù)鼗钡睦Ь澈统雎�。是否接受國際商事仲裁“非當?shù)鼗崩碚?學(xué)界所持意見相左,對該理論的評價褒貶不一�！胺钱�?shù)鼗崩碚擄柺軤幾h,是因為實現(xiàn)該理論存在一定的現(xiàn)實障礙:國家司法主權(quán)制約、當事人意思自治原則本身存在局限性、于仲裁的全過程中國際商事仲裁對仲裁地法院存有依賴、再加上非當?shù)匾?guī)則的不足等,影響和阻礙了國際商事仲裁“非當?shù)鼗壁厔莸倪M展。雖遇到現(xiàn)實障礙,但該理論并非進入死胡同,而為“非當?shù)鼗钡陌l(fā)展提供思想碰撞、理論完善的機會。該理論自身存在合理性,具有強大的生命力,同時順應(yīng)時代發(fā)展需要,擁有堅實的現(xiàn)實基礎(chǔ),因而“非當?shù)鼗钡某雎肥亲杂啥置篮玫�。文章主體第三部分闡釋了國際商事仲裁“非當?shù)鼗睆睦碚撎岢霭l(fā)展至今,已不僅僅停留在理論層面,而是逐步運用于具體實踐中。在國家層面上,得到了各國立法和實踐上的認可,在國際層面上,也得到了各個國際條約、UNCITRAL《示范法》、UNCITRAL《仲裁規(guī)則》等的肯定和支持。雖然“非當?shù)鼗背潭炔⒉灰恢?但從總體上觀察,國際商事仲裁“非當?shù)鼗壁厔菀褜崒嵲谠诖嬖�。文章主體第四部分闡述了筆者對“非當?shù)鼗壁厔菹挛覈俨弥贫热绾瓮晟频慕ㄗh。通過考察我國現(xiàn)行仲裁制度,從程序適用、司法監(jiān)督(著重于撤銷權(quán))以及被撤銷的國際商事仲裁裁決是否在我國得到承認和執(zhí)行三方面入手具體分析我國仲裁制度的不足,我國為彌補不足、順應(yīng)“非當?shù)鼗壁厔?不僅需要更新傳統(tǒng)仲裁觀念還應(yīng)立足于國情對仲裁法、機構(gòu)的仲裁規(guī)則進行修訂和完善。
[Abstract]:In the fifties and sixties of the 20th century, a new theory, "non-localization", was put forward, which is the inevitable outcome and important theoretical basis of the return of arbitration to its original origin and increasingly to internationalization and non-localization. Different from the traditional international commercial arbitration system, the theory of "non-localization" respects to a large extent the autonomy of the parties and the arbitral tribunal, breaks through the restriction of absolute application of the law of the place of arbitration, and weakens the judicial supervision of international commercial arbitration by the court. An award set aside shall have the right to decide whether or not to enforce it in accordance with the laws of that country. International commercial arbitration has formed a trend of "non-localization" on the whole. Although the trend is limited at present, it will not die out but has a brighter future. The first part of the article explains the emergence and causes of the trend of international commercial arbitration. Starting with three classic cases, this paper investigates the background of the emergence of the theory of "non-localization" of international commercial arbitration, probes into the concrete performance of the theory, and discusses the causes of the trend of "non-localization". For the detailed development of the theme of the article to play the role of argument. The second part explains the dilemma and outlet of international commercial arbitration. Scholars hold different opinions on whether to accept the theory of "non-localization" of international commercial arbitration. The theory of "non-localization" is controversial because there are some practical obstacles to the realization of the theory: the restriction of national judicial sovereignty, the limitation of the principle of party autonomy, In the whole process of arbitration, the international commercial arbitration relies on the court of the place of arbitration, plus the deficiency of non-local rules, which affects and hinders the progress of the trend of "non-localization" of international commercial arbitration. Although it meets with practical obstacles, the theory is not a dead end, but provides an opportunity for the development of "non-localization" to collide with ideas and perfect the theory. The theory has its own rationality, strong vitality, and meets the needs of the development of the times, and has a solid realistic foundation, so the way out of "non-localization" is free and beautiful. The third part of the article explains that "non-localization" of international commercial arbitration has been applied in practice, not only in theory, but also in practice. At the national level, it has been recognized by the legislation and practice of various countries, and at the international level, it has also been affirmed and supported by the UNCITRAL Model Law of various international treaties and the UNCITRAL Arbitration rules. Although the degree of "non-localization" is not consistent, the trend of "non-localization" of international commercial arbitration actually exists. The fourth part of the article expounds the author's suggestions on how to perfect the arbitration system under the trend of "non-localization". Through investigating the current arbitration system of our country, this paper analyzes the deficiency of our arbitration system from three aspects: procedure application, judicial supervision (emphasis on the right of rescission) and whether the revoked international commercial arbitration award is recognized and executed in our country. In order to make up for the deficiency and conform to the trend of "non-localization", our country should not only renew the traditional arbitration concept, but also revise and perfect the arbitration law and the arbitration rules of the institution based on the national conditions.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：上海師范大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2017
【分類號】：D997.4
【參考文獻】
相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條
1 張美紅;;法國國際商事仲裁程序完全“非國內(nèi)化”模式及我國的選擇[J];社會科學(xué)家;2014年09期
2 宋子笠;;驅(qū)散《紐約公約》在中國適用的迷霧——以《紐約公約》第一條展開[J];研究生法學(xué);2014年03期
3 毛海波;;芻議國際商事仲裁裁決司法監(jiān)督的最新趨勢——以英國達納案件為切入[J];仲裁研究;2013年02期
4 蘇南;;論國際商務(wù)仲裁的臺灣特色[J];仲裁研究;2011年04期
5 陳力;;ICC國際仲裁院在我國作成仲裁裁決的承認與執(zhí)行——兼論《紐約公約》視角下的“非內(nèi)國裁決”[J];法商研究;2010年06期
6 張慶元;陸薇;;國際商事仲裁中的國籍問題[J];仲裁研究;2010年02期
7 鐘澄;;再論《紐約公約》中的“非內(nèi)國裁決”[J];商事仲裁;2010年01期
8 郭小卿;李會文;;“非當?shù)鼗敝俨靡暯窍聡H商事仲裁程序法律適用的再審視[J];商事仲裁;2010年01期
9 陳翔;;論國際商事仲裁中“非國內(nèi)”規(guī)則的適用——美國、法國之比較研究[J];仲裁研究;2009年04期
10 趙秀文;;論《紐約公約》裁決在我國的承認與執(zhí)行——兼論我國涉外仲裁立法的修改與完善[J];江西社會科學(xué);2010年02期
，
本文編號：2054230
本文鏈接：http://sikaile.net/falvlunwen/guojifa/2054230.html
本文選題：國際商事仲裁 + 非當?shù)鼗?/strong> ； 參考：《上海師范大學(xué)》2017年碩士論文
【摘要】：在二十世紀五、六十年代,一個新的理論——“非當?shù)鼗崩碚摫惶岢?它是仲裁回歸本原、日益走向國際化和非當?shù)鼗谋厝划a(chǎn)物和重要的理論基礎(chǔ)。與傳統(tǒng)國際商事仲裁制度不同,“非當?shù)鼗崩碚撦^大程度地尊重當事人和仲裁庭的自治權(quán),突破了仲裁地法的絕對適用的限制,弱化法院對國際商事仲裁的司法監(jiān)督,對被撤銷的裁決有權(quán)依照本國法律決定是否給予執(zhí)行。國際商事仲裁在總體上已形成“非當?shù)鼗壁厔?雖然該趨勢目前處于有限狀態(tài),但它不會消亡反而前景更加光明。文章主體第一部分闡釋了國際商事仲裁“非當?shù)鼗壁厔莸漠a(chǎn)生和成因。從三個經(jīng)典案例入手,考察國際商事仲裁“非當?shù)鼗崩碚摦a(chǎn)生的時代背景,探究該理論的具體表現(xiàn),并論述“非當?shù)鼗壁厔莸某梢?為文章主題的詳細展開起到立論的作用。文章主體第二部分闡釋了國際商事仲裁仲裁“非當?shù)鼗钡睦Ь澈统雎�。是否接受國際商事仲裁“非當?shù)鼗崩碚?學(xué)界所持意見相左,對該理論的評價褒貶不一�！胺钱�?shù)鼗崩碚擄柺軤幾h,是因為實現(xiàn)該理論存在一定的現(xiàn)實障礙:國家司法主權(quán)制約、當事人意思自治原則本身存在局限性、于仲裁的全過程中國際商事仲裁對仲裁地法院存有依賴、再加上非當?shù)匾?guī)則的不足等,影響和阻礙了國際商事仲裁“非當?shù)鼗壁厔莸倪M展。雖遇到現(xiàn)實障礙,但該理論并非進入死胡同,而為“非當?shù)鼗钡陌l(fā)展提供思想碰撞、理論完善的機會。該理論自身存在合理性,具有強大的生命力,同時順應(yīng)時代發(fā)展需要,擁有堅實的現(xiàn)實基礎(chǔ),因而“非當?shù)鼗钡某雎肥亲杂啥置篮玫�。文章主體第三部分闡釋了國際商事仲裁“非當?shù)鼗睆睦碚撎岢霭l(fā)展至今,已不僅僅停留在理論層面,而是逐步運用于具體實踐中。在國家層面上,得到了各國立法和實踐上的認可,在國際層面上,也得到了各個國際條約、UNCITRAL《示范法》、UNCITRAL《仲裁規(guī)則》等的肯定和支持。雖然“非當?shù)鼗背潭炔⒉灰恢?但從總體上觀察,國際商事仲裁“非當?shù)鼗壁厔菀褜崒嵲谠诖嬖�。文章主體第四部分闡述了筆者對“非當?shù)鼗壁厔菹挛覈俨弥贫热绾瓮晟频慕ㄗh。通過考察我國現(xiàn)行仲裁制度,從程序適用、司法監(jiān)督(著重于撤銷權(quán))以及被撤銷的國際商事仲裁裁決是否在我國得到承認和執(zhí)行三方面入手具體分析我國仲裁制度的不足,我國為彌補不足、順應(yīng)“非當?shù)鼗壁厔?不僅需要更新傳統(tǒng)仲裁觀念還應(yīng)立足于國情對仲裁法、機構(gòu)的仲裁規(guī)則進行修訂和完善。
[Abstract]:In the fifties and sixties of the 20th century, a new theory, "non-localization", was put forward, which is the inevitable outcome and important theoretical basis of the return of arbitration to its original origin and increasingly to internationalization and non-localization. Different from the traditional international commercial arbitration system, the theory of "non-localization" respects to a large extent the autonomy of the parties and the arbitral tribunal, breaks through the restriction of absolute application of the law of the place of arbitration, and weakens the judicial supervision of international commercial arbitration by the court. An award set aside shall have the right to decide whether or not to enforce it in accordance with the laws of that country. International commercial arbitration has formed a trend of "non-localization" on the whole. Although the trend is limited at present, it will not die out but has a brighter future. The first part of the article explains the emergence and causes of the trend of international commercial arbitration. Starting with three classic cases, this paper investigates the background of the emergence of the theory of "non-localization" of international commercial arbitration, probes into the concrete performance of the theory, and discusses the causes of the trend of "non-localization". For the detailed development of the theme of the article to play the role of argument. The second part explains the dilemma and outlet of international commercial arbitration. Scholars hold different opinions on whether to accept the theory of "non-localization" of international commercial arbitration. The theory of "non-localization" is controversial because there are some practical obstacles to the realization of the theory: the restriction of national judicial sovereignty, the limitation of the principle of party autonomy, In the whole process of arbitration, the international commercial arbitration relies on the court of the place of arbitration, plus the deficiency of non-local rules, which affects and hinders the progress of the trend of "non-localization" of international commercial arbitration. Although it meets with practical obstacles, the theory is not a dead end, but provides an opportunity for the development of "non-localization" to collide with ideas and perfect the theory. The theory has its own rationality, strong vitality, and meets the needs of the development of the times, and has a solid realistic foundation, so the way out of "non-localization" is free and beautiful. The third part of the article explains that "non-localization" of international commercial arbitration has been applied in practice, not only in theory, but also in practice. At the national level, it has been recognized by the legislation and practice of various countries, and at the international level, it has also been affirmed and supported by the UNCITRAL Model Law of various international treaties and the UNCITRAL Arbitration rules. Although the degree of "non-localization" is not consistent, the trend of "non-localization" of international commercial arbitration actually exists. The fourth part of the article expounds the author's suggestions on how to perfect the arbitration system under the trend of "non-localization". Through investigating the current arbitration system of our country, this paper analyzes the deficiency of our arbitration system from three aspects: procedure application, judicial supervision (emphasis on the right of rescission) and whether the revoked international commercial arbitration award is recognized and executed in our country. In order to make up for the deficiency and conform to the trend of "non-localization", our country should not only renew the traditional arbitration concept, but also revise and perfect the arbitration law and the arbitration rules of the institution based on the national conditions.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：上海師范大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2017
【分類號】：D997.4
【參考文獻】
相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條
1 張美紅;;法國國際商事仲裁程序完全“非國內(nèi)化”模式及我國的選擇[J];社會科學(xué)家;2014年09期
2 宋子笠;;驅(qū)散《紐約公約》在中國適用的迷霧——以《紐約公約》第一條展開[J];研究生法學(xué);2014年03期
3 毛海波;;芻議國際商事仲裁裁決司法監(jiān)督的最新趨勢——以英國達納案件為切入[J];仲裁研究;2013年02期
4 蘇南;;論國際商務(wù)仲裁的臺灣特色[J];仲裁研究;2011年04期
5 陳力;;ICC國際仲裁院在我國作成仲裁裁決的承認與執(zhí)行——兼論《紐約公約》視角下的“非內(nèi)國裁決”[J];法商研究;2010年06期
6 張慶元;陸薇;;國際商事仲裁中的國籍問題[J];仲裁研究;2010年02期
7 鐘澄;;再論《紐約公約》中的“非內(nèi)國裁決”[J];商事仲裁;2010年01期
8 郭小卿;李會文;;“非當?shù)鼗敝俨靡暯窍聡H商事仲裁程序法律適用的再審視[J];商事仲裁;2010年01期
9 陳翔;;論國際商事仲裁中“非國內(nèi)”規(guī)則的適用——美國、法國之比較研究[J];仲裁研究;2009年04期
10 趙秀文;;論《紐約公約》裁決在我國的承認與執(zhí)行——兼論我國涉外仲裁立法的修改與完善[J];江西社會科學(xué);2010年02期
，本文編號：2054230
本文鏈接：http://sikaile.net/falvlunwen/guojifa/2054230.html
