發(fā)布時(shí)間：2018-03-07 23:29

  本文選題：仲裁第三人　切入點(diǎn)：仲裁　出處：《安徽大學(xué)》2013年碩士論文　論文類型：學(xué)位論文

【摘要】：仲裁雖系當(dāng)事人雙方之間通過達(dá)成合意而選取的一種糾紛解決方式,但是實(shí)踐中卻不可避免的會(huì)出現(xiàn)仲裁的內(nèi)容涉及第三方權(quán)益的情況,這種情況的日益增多不斷引發(fā)各種矛盾和沖突,因此,是否需要借鑒于民事訴訟第三人制度所發(fā)揮出的現(xiàn)實(shí)作用而在仲裁程序中也引入第三人制度逐漸引起了學(xué)界的討論和關(guān)注。 對(duì)于仲裁第三人問題,各國所持態(tài)度不一,我國學(xué)界也是如此。尤其在要不要構(gòu)建仲裁第三人制度、是否存在構(gòu)建的必要性方面更是存在著巨大的分歧,這種理論界的分歧也直接導(dǎo)致了實(shí)踐中關(guān)于此類相關(guān)問題解決方式的混亂。 本文第一部分從國內(nèi)關(guān)于仲裁第三人的概念界定爭(zhēng)議入手,對(duì)目前學(xué)界有關(guān)仲裁第三人概念的代表性理論及觀點(diǎn)進(jìn)行了探討,并在此基礎(chǔ)上提出了自己的見解,認(rèn)為仲裁第三人是指與正在進(jìn)行的仲裁案件的仲裁標(biāo)的存在實(shí)體法上的牽連關(guān)系而加入到仲裁程序中的仲裁協(xié)議當(dāng)事人以外的第三人。此處的仲裁協(xié)議當(dāng)事人是指廣義上的當(dāng)事人,不僅包括仲裁協(xié)議表面簽字人,還包括因仲裁協(xié)議的長臂效力而涵蓋的實(shí)質(zhì)當(dāng)事人。只有實(shí)質(zhì)當(dāng)事人以外符合條件的第三人才能成為仲裁第三人。 第二部分提出了在我國是否應(yīng)當(dāng)構(gòu)建仲裁第三人制度問題,文章認(rèn)為,我國是存在構(gòu)建仲裁第三人制度的必要性的,這是實(shí)踐的現(xiàn)實(shí)迫切需求、也是正當(dāng)程序的要求和與國際立法接軌的要求,是符合當(dāng)事人意思自治原則的相對(duì)性的,且那些反對(duì)設(shè)立仲裁第三人制度的理由也是不成立的。 第三部分對(duì)容易令人產(chǎn)生混淆的兩種制度即訴訟第三人制度和仲裁第三人制度進(jìn)行了比較研究,探討了它們之間的聯(lián)系與區(qū)別。具體而言,二者在設(shè)立依據(jù)、設(shè)置目的、價(jià)值追求、第三人參加程序的條件和時(shí)間方面存在共同之處,但是二者在確定主體的參照標(biāo)準(zhǔn)、權(quán)利范圍以及存在領(lǐng)域方面的區(qū)別也是很明顯的。除了訴訟第三人制度,合并仲裁制度的存在也很容易使人產(chǎn)生困惑,讓人懷疑構(gòu)建仲裁第三人制度是否是多余和沒必要的。其實(shí),合并仲裁時(shí)是存在多個(gè)仲裁程序的,而引入仲裁第三人則自始至終只有一個(gè)仲裁程序,二者雖存在某種程度上的聯(lián)系,但區(qū)別亦很明顯。 第四部分對(duì)域外仲裁第三人的相關(guān)立法進(jìn)行了考察,主要從立法模式、第三人的主體范圍、第三人參與仲裁程序的情形、第三人加入仲裁程序的條件以及仲裁庭的權(quán)限五個(gè)大方面介紹了不同國家和仲裁機(jī)構(gòu)的相關(guān)規(guī)定,并進(jìn)行了適當(dāng)?shù)目偨Y(jié),意在批判的基礎(chǔ)上通過參考借鑒,探索構(gòu)建符合我國目前仲裁實(shí)際需求的仲裁第三人制度。 最后,文章對(duì)我國仲裁第三人制度的具體構(gòu)建提出了自己的設(shè)想,并從立法模式選擇、仲裁第三人的參加程序、加入仲裁后的權(quán)利義務(wù)以及相關(guān)的救濟(jì)制度等方面提出了自己的立法建議。
[Abstract]:Although arbitration is a kind of dispute settlement method chosen by agreement between the parties, it is inevitable in practice that the content of arbitration involves the rights and interests of third parties. The increasing number of such situations has led to various contradictions and conflicts. Whether it is necessary to draw lessons from the practical role of the third party system in civil litigation and to introduce the third party system in the arbitration procedure has gradually aroused the discussion and concern of the academic circles. Different countries hold different attitudes towards the third party in arbitration, and so is the academic circle of our country. Especially, there are great differences in whether to construct the arbitration third party system and whether there is the necessity of constructing it. This kind of theoretical difference also leads to the confusion about the solution of this kind of related problem in practice. The first part of this paper starts with the domestic dispute about the definition of the third party of arbitration, discusses the representative theory and viewpoint of the third party concept of arbitration in academic circles at present, and puts forward its own opinion on this basis. The third party to arbitration refers to a third party other than the party to the arbitration agreement who is involved in substantive law on the subject matter of the arbitration case under way. The parties to the arbitration agreement in this case are. Referring to the parties in a broad sense, It includes not only the superficial signatory of the arbitration agreement, but also the substantive party covered by the long arm effect of the arbitration agreement. Only the third party who meets the conditions other than the substantive party can become the third party of arbitration. The second part raises the question whether we should construct the arbitration third party system in our country, the article thinks that our country has the necessity to construct the arbitration third party system, which is the realistic and urgent need of practice. It is also the requirement of due process and the requirement of conformity with international legislation, which accords with the relativity of the principle of party autonomy, and those reasons against the establishment of arbitration third party system are also untenable. In the third part, the author makes a comparative study of the two systems, the third party system of litigation and the third party system of arbitration, which are easy to cause confusion, and probes into the connection and difference between them. Value pursuit, the conditions and time for the third party to participate in the procedure have common ground, but the difference between the two in determining the subject's reference standard, the scope of the right and the field of existence is also very obvious, except for the litigation third party system. The existence of merger arbitration system is also easy to confuse people and make people doubt whether it is superfluous and unnecessary to construct arbitration third party system. In fact, there are many arbitration procedures in merger arbitration. There is only one arbitration procedure when the third party is introduced into arbitration. Although the two are related to some extent, the difference is also obvious. Part 4th investigates the relevant legislation of the third party in the extraterritorial arbitration, mainly from the legislative model, the scope of the third party's subject, the situation of the third party's participation in the arbitration procedure, The conditions for the third party to join the arbitration procedure and the jurisdiction of the arbitration tribunal in five major aspects introduce the relevant provisions of different countries and arbitration institutions, and make an appropriate summary, in order to use for reference on the basis of criticism. To explore the construction of arbitration third party system in line with the actual needs of arbitration in China. Finally, the article puts forward its own idea on the concrete construction of the third party system of arbitration in our country, and chooses the legislative model and the procedure of participating in the arbitration of the third party. After joining the arbitration, the author puts forward his own legislative suggestions on the rights and obligations of the arbitration as well as the relevant relief system.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：安徽大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2013
【分類號(hào)】：D925.7

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 喬慧娟;;論仲裁第三人[J];北方工業(yè)大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào);2008年02期

2 白雪;;仲裁第三人制度探究[J];長沙航空職業(yè)技術(shù)學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2006年03期

3 夏蔚;仲裁第三人研究[J];當(dāng)代法學(xué);2000年05期

4 羅建芳;;仲裁第三人制度的問題分析與程序構(gòu)建[J];東方企業(yè)文化;2010年10期

5 唐敏,邱文英;試論對(duì)仲裁案外人合法權(quán)益的法律保護(hù)[J];福建政法管理干部學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2003年03期

6 侯登華;;仲裁協(xié)議的法律性質(zhì)分析[J];法學(xué)雜志;2006年04期

7 郭玉軍;;論仲裁第三人[J];法學(xué)家;2001年03期

8 林一飛;論仲裁與第三人[J];法學(xué)評(píng)論;2000年01期

9 蕭凱;羅驍;;仲裁第三人的法理基礎(chǔ)與規(guī)則制定[J];法學(xué)評(píng)論;2006年05期

10 袁寶;;淺談國際商事仲裁第三人[J];法制與社會(huì);2010年03期

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前10條

1 肖琦;論國際商事仲裁第三人[D];華東政法大學(xué);2011年

2 陳曉萍;我國仲裁第三人制度的構(gòu)建[D];西南財(cái)經(jīng)大學(xué);2011年

3 徐紅;仲裁第三人制度研究[D];中國政法大學(xué);2006年

4 李連宇;論國際商事仲裁中的第三人制度[D];西南政法大學(xué);2006年

5 曹莉;仲裁第三人問題研究[D];上海交通大學(xué);2007年

6 董曙雯;論民商事仲裁第三人[D];鄭州大學(xué);2007年

7 王曉青;國際商事仲裁中的第三人問題[D];吉林大學(xué);2009年

8 胡麗暉;仲裁第三人制度研究[D];華東政法大學(xué);2009年

9 何凡;論我國仲裁第三人制度的構(gòu)建[D];中國政法大學(xué);2010年

10 楊靜;國際商事仲裁第三人制度探究[D];沈陽師范大學(xué);2012年

，

本文編號(hào)：1581460