树欲静而风不止：CICC司法审查仲裁协议第一案未尽问题之审思

Re-considering on the Non-resolved Issues of the First Judicial Review on the Validity of the Arbitral Clause by CICC

成果信息
DC信息
传播影响力
本库下载频次:
本库浏览频次:
CNKI下载频次:0

归属学者：

张春良

归属院系：

国际法学院

作者：

张春良 ;毛杰

摘要：

"(2019)最高法民特1号"案是最高人民法院国际商事法庭司法审查仲裁条款效力的第一案,其审查理路凸显了我国人民法院在涉外仲裁协议的司法审查实践中未尽澄清的两个问题。其一是未区分仲裁协议"存在与否"的成立问题与"有效与否"的效力问题。后者应选法调整;前者则应区分成立的事实判断与价值判断,事实判断用证据解决,价值判断则需选法调整。其二是在按涉外合同方式认定涉外仲裁条款的效力时,关于涉外合同法律适用的分割论是否及如何适用于涉外仲裁条款有昧而不彰之处,核心问题是形式要件的法律适用,司法实践中存在着未经反思的法院地法直接适用倾向。人民法院应主动审查涉外仲裁协议当事人的缔约能力,并将涉外仲裁条款形式要件并入实质要件,进而按照涉外合同法律适用的二分论配置其法律适用。

出版日期：

2020-07-10

学科：

诉讼法学

提交日期：

2020-11-06

引用参考：

张春良;毛杰. 树欲静而风不止：CICC司法审查仲裁协议第一案未尽问题之审思[J]. 商事仲裁与调解,2020(02):92-107.

全文附件授权许可：

知识共享许可协议-署名

  • dc.title
  • 树欲静而风不止：CICC司法审查仲裁协议第一案未尽问题之审思
  • dc.contributor.author
  • 张春良;毛杰
  • dc.contributor.author
  • ZHANG chunliang;MAO Jie
  • dc.contributor.affiliation
  • 西南政法大学国际法学院;中国仲裁学院
  • dc.publisher
  • 商事仲裁与调解
  • dc.publisher
  • Commercial Arbitration & Mediation
  • dc.identifier.year
  • 2020
  • dc.identifier.issue
  • 02
  • dc.identifier.volume
  • No.2
  • dc.identifier.page
  • 92-107
  • dc.date.issued
  • 2020-07-10
  • dc.subject
  • 涉外仲裁协议;司法审查;法律适用;国际商事法庭
  • dc.subject
  • arbitration agreement with foreign elements;judicial review;law choice;CICC
  • dc.description.abstract
  • "(2019)最高法民特1号"案是最高人民法院国际商事法庭司法审查仲裁条款效力的第一案,其审查理路凸显了我国人民法院在涉外仲裁协议的司法审查实践中未尽澄清的两个问题。其一是未区分仲裁协议"存在与否"的成立问题与"有效与否"的效力问题。后者应选法调整;前者则应区分成立的事实判断与价值判断,事实判断用证据解决,价值判断则需选法调整。其二是在按涉外合同方式认定涉外仲裁条款的效力时,关于涉外合同法律适用的分割论是否及如何适用于涉外仲裁条款有昧而不彰之处,核心问题是形式要件的法律适用,司法实践中存在着未经反思的法院地法直接适用倾向。人民法院应主动审查涉外仲裁协议当事人的缔约能力,并将涉外仲裁条款形式要件并入实质要件,进而按照涉外合同法律适用的二分论配置其法律适用。
  • dc.description.abstract
  • The case of(2019) No.1 of CICC is the first case of the judicial review on the validity of the arbitration clause by China International Commercial Court, which has highlighted two issues that our courts have not clarified in the judicial review practice of foreign-related arbitration agreements. One is to confuse the issue of the existence of the arbitration agreement with the validity of the validity or not. The latter should choose the legal adjustment; the former should distinguish between established fact judgments and value judgments. Fact judgments are resolved by evidence. Value judgments need to be adjusted according to the law chosen.The second is that when determining the effectiveness of foreign-related arbitration clauses with reference to foreign-related contracts, it is unclear whether and how the division theory applicable to foreign-related contract laws applies to foreign-related arbitration clauses. The core issue is the legal application of formal requirements. The tendency to apply the local law of the court directly. The formal requirements of foreign-related arbitration clauses should be incorporated into the substantive requirements, so as to configure its legal application with reference to the dichotomy of foreign contract law.
  • dc.description.sponsorshipPCode
  • 201919XTY004
  • dc.description.sponsorship
  • 2019年度国家社科项目（19XTY004）阶段性成果
  • dc.description.sponsorshipsource
  • 国家社会科学基金
  • dc.identifier.CN
  • 10-1667/F
  • dc.identifier.issn
  • 2096-8035
  • dc.identifier.if
  • 0
  • dc.subject.discipline
  • D925.7
回到顶部