【摘要】：仲裁作為一種獨(dú)立于訴訟外的糾紛解決方式，其具有的自治性特點(diǎn)決定了其必然要受到國(guó)家的司法監(jiān)督，而撤銷(xiāo)仲裁裁決制度便是司法對(duì)仲裁進(jìn)行監(jiān)督的一種重要方式。因?yàn)閲?guó)際商事仲裁涉及到不同國(guó)家之間的關(guān)系，而各國(guó)對(duì)于撤銷(xiāo)仲裁裁決的理由規(guī)定各不相同，對(duì)于被撤銷(xiāo)的仲裁裁決的效力認(rèn)定的標(biāo)準(zhǔn)和依據(jù)也存在差異。因此，現(xiàn)實(shí)中就出現(xiàn)了一些國(guó)家對(duì)已經(jīng)被仲裁裁決地國(guó)家撤銷(xiāo)的國(guó)際商事仲裁進(jìn)行承認(rèn)及執(zhí)行。 按照傳統(tǒng)的仲裁理論來(lái)看，，因?yàn)橹俨貌脹Q的效力是依附于某個(gè)國(guó)家特定的法律體系內(nèi)，一項(xiàng)仲裁裁決若是被裁決作出地國(guó)家的法律所撤銷(xiāo)，那該項(xiàng)仲裁裁決的效力就不復(fù)存在，不能再獲得承認(rèn)及執(zhí)行。然而，實(shí)踐中出現(xiàn)的對(duì)已經(jīng)被仲裁裁決作出地國(guó)家撤銷(xiāo)的仲裁裁決的承認(rèn)及執(zhí)行案例，使得傳統(tǒng)的仲裁理論受到了挑戰(zhàn)，由此引發(fā)了學(xué)界對(duì)“已經(jīng)被撤銷(xiāo)的國(guó)際商事仲裁裁決是否還具有可行性”問(wèn)題的爭(zhēng)論。本文主要是從理論，實(shí)踐以及結(jié)合我國(guó)的相關(guān)立法來(lái)對(duì)此問(wèn)題進(jìn)行探討。 本文共包括四個(gè)章節(jié)，第一章是對(duì)國(guó)際商事仲裁裁決撤銷(xiāo)制度的簡(jiǎn)述，簡(jiǎn)要論述了國(guó)際商事仲裁裁決的國(guó)籍、撤銷(xiāo)國(guó)際商事仲裁裁決的含義、國(guó)際上對(duì)撤銷(xiāo)商事仲裁裁決的相關(guān)立法以及對(duì)國(guó)際商事仲裁裁決撤銷(xiāo)權(quán)歸屬問(wèn)題的分析等，為本文做好理論鋪墊。第二章主要是通過(guò)對(duì)國(guó)際商事仲裁裁決制度的存廢之爭(zhēng)以及在國(guó)際商事仲裁中撤銷(xiāo)仲裁裁決制度和承認(rèn)與執(zhí)行制度的不同來(lái)闡述國(guó)際商事仲裁裁決撤銷(xiāo)制度的意義。第三章為承認(rèn)及執(zhí)行被撤銷(xiāo)的國(guó)際商事仲裁裁決的實(shí)踐和其理論之爭(zhēng)。首先是對(duì)法國(guó)、美國(guó)執(zhí)行已經(jīng)被撤銷(xiāo)的國(guó)際商事仲裁裁決的案例進(jìn)行探討，其次是總結(jié)分析學(xué)界對(duì)承認(rèn)及執(zhí)行被撤銷(xiāo)的國(guó)際商事仲裁裁決的理論之爭(zhēng)，然后提出自己對(duì)該問(wèn)題的認(rèn)識(shí)以及我國(guó)的態(tài)度。第四章通過(guò)分析我國(guó)在撤銷(xiāo)涉外仲裁中的撤銷(xiāo)事由的規(guī)定、審理撤銷(xiāo)仲裁裁決案件的程序、撤銷(xiāo)的法律后果等方面的立法現(xiàn)狀，提出一些對(duì)完善我國(guó)撤銷(xiāo)涉外仲裁裁決制度的建議。
[Abstract]:Arbitration, as a kind of dispute settlement method independent of litigation, has the autonomy characteristic that it must be subject to the judicial supervision of the country. The annulment of arbitration award system is an important way for judicial supervision of arbitration. Because the international commercial arbitration involves the relations between different countries, the different countries have different provisions on the reasons for setting aside the arbitral award, and the standards and bases for the determination of the validity of the set aside arbitral award are also different. Therefore, in reality, some countries recognize and enforce the international commercial arbitration which has been revoked by the country where the arbitral award is made. According to traditional arbitration theory, because the effect of an arbitral award is attached to a specific legal system of a country, if an arbitral award is set aside by the law of the country where the award is made, the validity of the arbitral award ceases to exist. Can no longer be recognized and enforced. However, the traditional arbitration theory is challenged by the cases of recognition and enforcement of the arbitral award which has been revoked by the country where the arbitral award has been made. This led to a debate about whether the annulled international commercial arbitration award is feasible or not. This article is mainly from the theory, the practice and the union our country related legislation to carry on the discussion to this question. The first chapter is a brief description of the annulment system of international commercial arbitration awards, briefly discusses the nationality of international commercial arbitration awards, the meaning of annulment of international commercial arbitration awards. The international legislation on annulment of commercial arbitration award and the analysis of the attribution of revocation right of international commercial arbitration award pave the way for the theory of this paper. The second chapter mainly expounds the significance of the annulment system of international commercial arbitration award through the argument of the existence and abrogation of the system of international commercial arbitration award and the difference between the system of annulment of arbitral award and the system of recognition and enforcement in international commercial arbitration. The third chapter is about the practice of recognition and enforcement of annulled international commercial arbitration award and its theoretical controversy. The first is to discuss the cases of France and the United States enforcing the revoked international commercial arbitration awards, and the second is to summarize and analyze the academic theories about the recognition and enforcement of revoked international commercial arbitration awards. Then put forward their own understanding of the problem and our attitude. The fourth chapter analyzes the current legislative situation of our country in the aspects of revocation of foreign arbitration, the procedure of hearing the case of annulment of arbitration award, the legal consequences of revocation, and so on. Some suggestions are put forward to perfect the system of annulment of foreign arbitration award in China.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：華東政法大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2012
【分類(lèi)號(hào)】：D997.4

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 陳安;論中國(guó)涉外仲裁的監(jiān)督機(jī)制及其與國(guó)際慣例的接軌[J];比較法研究;1995年04期

2 謝新勝;;論爭(zhēng)中的已撤銷(xiāo)國(guó)際商事仲裁裁決之承認(rèn)與執(zhí)行[J];北京仲裁;2007年03期

3 李灃樺;;已撤銷(xiāo)商事仲裁裁決之承認(rèn)與執(zhí)行實(shí)證研究——以Chromalloy案為例對(duì)《紐約公約》的適用分析[J];北京仲裁;2008年03期

4 趙秀文;從克羅馬羅依案看國(guó)際仲裁裁決的撤銷(xiāo)與執(zhí)行[J];法商研究;2002年05期

5 肖永平;也談我國(guó)法院對(duì)仲裁的監(jiān)督范圍——與陳安先生商榷[J];法學(xué)評(píng)論;1998年01期

6 劉維民;;關(guān)于我國(guó)仲裁涉外裁決撤銷(xiāo)制度的研究[J];當(dāng)代經(jīng)濟(jì);2007年09期

7 ;最高人民法院關(guān)于當(dāng)事人對(duì)人民法院撤銷(xiāo)仲裁裁決的裁定不服申請(qǐng)?jiān)賹徣嗣穹ㄔ菏欠袷芾韱?wèn)題的批復(fù)[J];中華人民共和國(guó)最高人民法院公報(bào);1999年02期

8 王秀玲;我國(guó)涉外仲裁的司法審查及其修改與完善[J];河北法學(xué);2005年05期

9 趙秀文;論國(guó)際商事仲裁裁決的國(guó)籍及其撤銷(xiāo)的理論與實(shí)踐[J];法制與社會(huì)發(fā)展;2002年01期

10 張志軍;張琪瑋;;我國(guó)涉外仲裁司法審查制度探析[J];山東審判(山東法官培訓(xùn)學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào));2006年03期

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前9條

1 欒海萍;已撤銷(xiāo)國(guó)際商事仲裁裁決的域外效力研究[D];遼寧大學(xué);2011年

2 江仁所;論已撤銷(xiāo)國(guó)際商事仲裁裁決的承認(rèn)和執(zhí)行[D];華東政法學(xué)院;2005年

3 楊楠;國(guó)際商事仲裁裁決的撤銷(xiāo)權(quán)歸屬問(wèn)題探析[D];中國(guó)政法大學(xué);2006年

4 劉云甫;論國(guó)際商事仲裁裁決的撤銷(xiāo)[D];廣東外語(yǔ)外貿(mào)大學(xué);2006年

5 王唯駿;我國(guó)仲裁裁決撤銷(xiāo)司法審查制度研究[D];華東政法學(xué)院;2005年

6 周?chē)?guó)杰;論承認(rèn)與執(zhí)行已撤銷(xiāo)國(guó)際商事仲裁裁決[D];中國(guó)政法大學(xué);2007年

7 朱挺;論撤銷(xiāo)仲裁裁決司法審查不當(dāng)?shù)木葷?jì)制度[D];上海交通大學(xué);2007年

8 馬雪英;論我國(guó)涉外仲裁裁決的撤銷(xiāo)制度[D];中國(guó)政法大學(xué);2009年

9 程永強(qiáng);論被撤銷(xiāo)外國(guó)仲裁裁決的承認(rèn)與執(zhí)行[D];廈門(mén)大學(xué);2009年

本文編號(hào)：2183863