我国“或裁或审”条款的反思与突破--兼评《仲裁法司法解释》第7条被引量：2

On the Development of the“Selecting Arbitration Orlitigation”Clause--Comments on Article 7 of Judicial Interpretation of Arbitration Law

在线阅读下载PDF

导出

摘要由于没有明确的立法规定,“或裁或审”条款的性质与类型在认定上十分模糊,因此各级人民法院经常在该问题上产生混乱。例如,“或裁或审”条款与“一裁终局”条款相混淆,多份协议与单一协议中的“或裁或审”条款相模糊,以及对《最高人民法院关于适用〈中华人民共和国仲裁法〉若干问题的解释》(以下简称《仲裁法司法解释》)第7条的理解不一致等。虽然最高人民法院发布的司法解释或指导性案例能为各级人民法院在“或裁或审”条款的性质与类型的定性中提供指引,但并不能从根本上解决《仲裁法司法解释》第7条中对于仲裁协议无效的规定。纵观各国对于既约定仲裁又约定诉讼的条款的态度,我国对于仲裁无效的判定过于严厉,这与我国正在推进建立亚太国际仲裁中心的政策考量不入。只有对法律制度的突破与变更才能在实质上修正立法的滞后性。先管辖先受理原则的借鉴,不仅可以为维护当事人意思自治提供出路,而且可以为我国鼓励与支持仲裁的发展消弭弊端。 Due to no specific rules in legislation,the nature and the type of“selecting arbitration or litigation”clause is quite ambiguous.Therefore,local people s courts often cause judicial confusions in handling this matter,for example,“selecting arbitration or litigation”clause is often confused with“single ruling system”clause,“selecting arbitration or litigation”clause“in multiple agreements is often confused with“selecting arbitration or litigation”clause in single agreement,and the Article 7 of judicial interpretation of arbitration law is interpretedinconsistently.Even though issuing judicial interpretations or guiding cases may lead the way for local people s courts on recognizing the character and the type of“selecting arbitration or litigation”clause,the invalid stipulation in Article 7 of judicial interpretation of arbitration law could not be shaken essentially.When we look through how other countries deal with such inconsistent jurisdiction clause,we could find out that the our provision of invaliding the arbitration agreement goes too far,which is obviously incompatible with the political consideration of establishing the international arbitration center in Asia.Hence,only by breaking and changing legal regime can substantially correct the hysteresis of legislation,and the reference of“first-seized rule”can not only pave the way for party s autonomy,but also eliminate the disadvantages for the development of encouraging and supporting arbitration in China.

作者杜涛张炳南 DU Tao;ZHANG Bing-nan(International Law Faculty of East China University of Political Science of Law,Shanghai 200042,China)

机构地区华东政法大学国际法学院

出处《时代法学》 2020年第1期35-44,共10页 Presentday Law Science

关键词仲裁协议或裁或审一裁终局平行诉讼 arbitration agreement select arbitration or litigation single ruling system parallel proceedings

分类号 DF97 [政治法律—国际法学]