本文選題：國(guó)際商事仲裁 + 非內(nèi)國(guó)仲裁裁決��； 參考：《山西大學(xué)》2012年碩士論文

【摘要】：隨著中國(guó)經(jīng)濟(jì)發(fā)展,中國(guó)與國(guó)際間的貿(mào)易往來(lái)越來(lái)越密切,在此過(guò)程中,出現(xiàn)越來(lái)越多的貿(mào)易糾紛,并有逐年上升的趨勢(shì)。然而,若在爭(zhēng)議雙方的其中一國(guó)參與訴訟,除了有國(guó)家地域保護(hù)的擔(dān)憂之外,還伴隨著昂貴的訴訟成本,冗長(zhǎng)的訴訟程序,及不熟悉當(dāng)?shù)胤傻炔焕蛩卮嬖�。因�?更多的人們開(kāi)始選擇國(guó)際仲裁這一相對(duì)快捷的方式。國(guó)際仲裁也成為解決商事?tīng)?zhēng)議的一個(gè)重要途徑。關(guān)于國(guó)際商事仲裁在一國(guó)內(nèi)的承認(rèn)與執(zhí)行,其主要依據(jù)是1958年《承認(rèn)及執(zhí)行外國(guó)仲裁裁決公約》(《紐約公約》),我國(guó)在1987年加入該公約,并對(duì)其中一些條款作出保留。大量案例表明,我國(guó)在司法實(shí)踐中很好的實(shí)現(xiàn)了我國(guó)加入該公約時(shí)的初衷和承諾。但是我國(guó)在承認(rèn)和執(zhí)行的過(guò)程中,由于保留聲明,對(duì)于在我國(guó)境內(nèi)做出的、但依照我國(guó)法律又不認(rèn)為是我國(guó)仲裁裁決的非內(nèi)國(guó)仲裁裁決沒(méi)有規(guī)定,相關(guān)立法存在一定的缺陷。除此之外,我國(guó)在司法實(shí)踐中,對(duì)于如何確定仲裁裁決的國(guó)籍存在不少的模糊之處。由此,在之前出現(xiàn)的承認(rèn)和執(zhí)行非內(nèi)國(guó)仲裁裁決的案例中,出現(xiàn)了不少充滿爭(zhēng)議之處。學(xué)界和實(shí)務(wù)界對(duì)于如何認(rèn)定、怎么認(rèn)定、認(rèn)定之后是否應(yīng)該予以承認(rèn)和執(zhí)行都有很大爭(zhēng)議。在本文中,針對(duì)在實(shí)踐中出現(xiàn)的各式問(wèn)題,希望能夠通過(guò)典型案例,經(jīng)深入分析得出我國(guó)目前存在的缺陷、問(wèn)題,并結(jié)合我國(guó)的立法及實(shí)踐現(xiàn)狀,提出相應(yīng)的解決對(duì)策。以求既能解決相關(guān)問(wèn)題,又能夠保有我國(guó)的司法主權(quán)。
[Abstract]:With the development of China's economy, the trade between China and the world is getting closer and closer. In the process, more and more trade disputes appear, and the trend is rising year by year. However, if one of the parties to the dispute is involved in litigation, there are also disadvantages such as high litigation costs, lengthy proceedings, and lack of familiarity with local law, in addition to national territorial protection concerns. As a result, more people began to choose international arbitration as a relatively fast way. International arbitration has also become an important way to settle commercial disputes. With regard to the recognition and enforcement of international commercial arbitration in one country, the main basis is the 1958 Convention on the recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards (the New York Convention). China acceded to the Convention in 1987 and made reservations to some of its provisions. A large number of cases show that the original intention and promise of China's accession to the Convention have been well realized in judicial practice. However, in the process of recognition and enforcement, due to the reservation of the declaration, there are some defects in the relevant legislation for the non-domestic arbitration award which is made in our country, but which is not considered to be an arbitral award in our country according to the law of our country. In addition, in our judicial practice, there are many ambiguities about how to determine the nationality of arbitration award. Therefore, there are many disputes in the previous cases of recognition and enforcement of non-domestic arbitral awards. Academic and practical circles have a lot of controversy about how to identify, whether to recognize and enforce after the confirmation. In this paper, in view of the various kinds of problems in practice, I hope that through the typical cases, through in-depth analysis of the defects and problems existing in our country, and combined with the legislation and practice of the status quo, put forward the corresponding solutions. In order to solve the relevant problems, but also to retain our judicial sovereignty.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：山西大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2012
【分類號(hào)】：D997.4

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 鐘澄;;《執(zhí)行國(guó)際仲裁協(xié)議和裁決的公約(待完善草案)》評(píng)析[J];北京仲裁;2009年01期

2 王延川;;商事行為類型化及多元立法模式——兼論商事行為的司法適用[J];當(dāng)代法學(xué);2011年04期

3 萬(wàn)鄂湘;;《紐約公約》在中國(guó)的司法實(shí)踐[J];法律適用;2009年03期

4 李健;;外國(guó)仲裁機(jī)構(gòu)在中國(guó)內(nèi)地仲裁不可行[J];法學(xué);2008年12期

5 趙秀文;;從相關(guān)案例看ICC仲裁院裁決在我國(guó)的承認(rèn)與執(zhí)行[J];法學(xué);2010年03期

6 趙秀文;;從旭普林公司案看我國(guó)法院對(duì)國(guó)際商事仲裁的監(jiān)督[J];時(shí)代法學(xué);2007年06期

7 趙秀文;;從寧波工藝品公司案看我國(guó)法院對(duì)涉外仲裁協(xié)議的監(jiān)督[J];時(shí)代法學(xué);2010年05期

8 王天紅;;論國(guó)際商事仲裁裁決國(guó)籍的確定[J];人民司法;2006年09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 王瀚,李廣輝;論仲裁庭自裁管轄權(quán)原則[J];中國(guó)法學(xué);2004年02期

，

本文編號(hào)：2099963