非洲商法統(tǒng)一組織仲裁制度與中國仲裁制度比較研究
發(fā)布時間：2018-10-22 08:07
【摘要】： 當(dāng)今世界加速進(jìn)入經(jīng)濟動蕩、格局調(diào)整、體系變革的新階段。在世界金融危機的大背景下,中非合作的規(guī)模將不斷擴大,共同應(yīng)對金融危機帶來的沖擊。因此,如何加深對非洲各國法律制度的理解,明晰中國法律制度與非洲法律制度的差異,以便在經(jīng)濟活動中把握各種法律風(fēng)險,成為中國投資方普遍關(guān)注的問題。 非洲商法統(tǒng)一組織(OHADA)是由西非16個國家創(chuàng)建的一個區(qū)域性國際組織,其目的是對成員國國內(nèi)商法進(jìn)行協(xié)調(diào),統(tǒng)一各成員國國內(nèi)立法,從而減少貿(mào)易障礙,促進(jìn)投資,發(fā)展各國的經(jīng)濟。OHADA已成為對非洲商法影響最大的組織之一,主要成就是制定了八部統(tǒng)一法,其中之一為《仲裁統(tǒng)一法》。同時,OHADA的最高司法機構(gòu)司法與仲裁共同法院(CCJA)作為仲裁中心也有一套仲裁規(guī)則。因此,OHADA仲裁制度包括兩套體系,即根據(jù)《仲裁統(tǒng)一法》進(jìn)行的仲裁和在司法與仲裁共同法院內(nèi)進(jìn)行的仲裁。OHADA仲裁制度已經(jīng)成為該地區(qū)解決商事爭議最主要的機制。中國仲裁制度是以1994年頒布的《仲裁法》為主體,結(jié)合《民事訴訟法》關(guān)于仲裁的規(guī)定以及相關(guān)的司法解釋形成的單一體系。 仲裁作為當(dāng)今國際社會普遍認(rèn)可的商事爭議解決方式,在全世界范圍內(nèi)表現(xiàn)出一定的趨同性。因此,OHADA的仲裁制度與中國的仲裁制度在仲裁基本原則方面表現(xiàn)出一定的相似性。但是,由于地理環(huán)境、歷史發(fā)展過程、經(jīng)濟發(fā)展水平等方面的差異,二者在仲裁的定義、仲裁的分類以及仲裁法律制度的淵源等方面都諸多差異。另外,就具體的仲裁制度而言,二者在仲裁范圍,仲裁協(xié)議、仲裁的組織形式、仲裁申請和受理、仲裁審理和裁決等方面既有相似之處也有差異之處。OHADA仲裁制度相對于中國仲裁制度而言,要更加開放,對于仲裁也持更為支持的態(tài)度。 總而言之,通過對比較研究,我們能夠很好的明晰二者在仲裁理論和仲裁基本制度方面的主要差異。對于中國投資者在非投資爭議解決具有指導(dǎo)意義。同時,中國《仲裁法》修改時也可以考慮借鑒OHADA仲裁制度中的合理內(nèi)核。
[Abstract]:Today the world is accelerating into a new stage of economic turmoil, structural adjustment, and system change. In the context of the world financial crisis, the scale of China-Africa cooperation will continue to expand, to jointly cope with the impact of the financial crisis. Therefore, how to deepen the understanding of African countries' legal system and clarify the difference between Chinese legal system and African legal system, in order to grasp various legal risks in economic activities, has become a common concern of Chinese investors. The Organization for the Harmonization of Commercial Law in Africa (OHADA) is a regional international organization founded by 16 countries in West Africa, whose aim is to harmonize the domestic commercial laws of member States and harmonize their domestic legislation, thereby reducing trade barriers and promoting investment. OHADA has become one of the most influential organizations in commercial law in Africa. Its main achievement is the enactment of eight uniform laws, one of which is the uniform Arbitration Act. At the same time, (CCJA), the common court of justice and arbitration, the supreme judicial body of OHADA, also has a set of arbitration rules as the arbitration center. Therefore, OHADA arbitration system includes two sets of systems, that is, arbitration under uniform Law of Arbitration and Arbitration in the Common Court of Judicature and Arbitration. OHADA arbitration system has become the most important mechanism for settling commercial disputes in this region. The arbitration system of China is a single system based on the Arbitration Law promulgated in 1994, combined with the provisions of the Civil procedure Law on arbitration and related judicial interpretations. Arbitration, as a universally accepted commercial dispute settlement method in the international community, shows some convergence all over the world. Therefore, the arbitration system of OHADA and the arbitration system of China show some similarities in the basic principles of arbitration. However, due to the differences in geographical environment, historical development process, economic development level and so on, there are many differences in the definition of arbitration, the classification of arbitration and the origin of arbitration legal system. In addition, as far as the specific arbitration system is concerned, the scope of arbitration, the arbitration agreement, the form of organization of arbitration, the application for arbitration and the acceptance of the arbitration, The arbitration system of OHADA should be more open and supportive than that of China. In a word, through the comparative study, we can clarify the main differences between the two in the arbitration theory and the arbitration basic system. For Chinese investors in non-investment dispute resolution has guiding significance. At the same time, the reasonable core of OHADA arbitration system can be taken into account in the revision of Chinese Arbitration Law.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：湘潭大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2010
【分類號】：D925.7
本文編號：2286595
[Abstract]:Today the world is accelerating into a new stage of economic turmoil, structural adjustment, and system change. In the context of the world financial crisis, the scale of China-Africa cooperation will continue to expand, to jointly cope with the impact of the financial crisis. Therefore, how to deepen the understanding of African countries' legal system and clarify the difference between Chinese legal system and African legal system, in order to grasp various legal risks in economic activities, has become a common concern of Chinese investors. The Organization for the Harmonization of Commercial Law in Africa (OHADA) is a regional international organization founded by 16 countries in West Africa, whose aim is to harmonize the domestic commercial laws of member States and harmonize their domestic legislation, thereby reducing trade barriers and promoting investment. OHADA has become one of the most influential organizations in commercial law in Africa. Its main achievement is the enactment of eight uniform laws, one of which is the uniform Arbitration Act. At the same time, (CCJA), the common court of justice and arbitration, the supreme judicial body of OHADA, also has a set of arbitration rules as the arbitration center. Therefore, OHADA arbitration system includes two sets of systems, that is, arbitration under uniform Law of Arbitration and Arbitration in the Common Court of Judicature and Arbitration. OHADA arbitration system has become the most important mechanism for settling commercial disputes in this region. The arbitration system of China is a single system based on the Arbitration Law promulgated in 1994, combined with the provisions of the Civil procedure Law on arbitration and related judicial interpretations. Arbitration, as a universally accepted commercial dispute settlement method in the international community, shows some convergence all over the world. Therefore, the arbitration system of OHADA and the arbitration system of China show some similarities in the basic principles of arbitration. However, due to the differences in geographical environment, historical development process, economic development level and so on, there are many differences in the definition of arbitration, the classification of arbitration and the origin of arbitration legal system. In addition, as far as the specific arbitration system is concerned, the scope of arbitration, the arbitration agreement, the form of organization of arbitration, the application for arbitration and the acceptance of the arbitration, The arbitration system of OHADA should be more open and supportive than that of China. In a word, through the comparative study, we can clarify the main differences between the two in the arbitration theory and the arbitration basic system. For Chinese investors in non-investment dispute resolution has guiding significance. At the same time, the reasonable core of OHADA arbitration system can be taken into account in the revision of Chinese Arbitration Law.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：湘潭大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2010
【分類號】：D925.7
【參考文獻(xiàn)】
相關(guān)期刊論文 前3條
1 劉俊,朱志權(quán),周春華;聯(lián)合國仲裁示范法與中國仲裁法比較研究[J];撫州師專學(xué)報;2003年01期
2 吳蓮;中國仲裁制度與國際商事仲裁制度的發(fā)展與趨同[J];廣西公安管理干部學(xué)院學(xué)報;2000年03期
3 朱偉東;非洲國際商法統(tǒng)一化與協(xié)調(diào)化[J];西亞非洲;2003年03期
相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前2條
1 張薔;國際商事仲裁制度研究[D];山東大學(xué);2006年
2 汪世芳;OHADA公路貨物運輸統(tǒng)一法及對中國的啟示[D];湘潭大學(xué);2007年
，本文編號：2286595
本文鏈接：http://sikaile.net/falvlunwen/sflw/2286595.html
