论文部分内容阅读
对于仲裁性质的不同认识决定了仲裁员责任确立与否。本文赞同仲裁性质理论中的混合说以及仲裁员有限责任论,但同时指出在适用仲裁员有限责任论的多个国家中,对仲裁员在何种情况下应当承担民事责任缺乏统一的认识和标准。本文从混合说的基本理论入手,并试确立一个统一的仲裁员承担民事责任的标准,即基于仲裁具有契约性和司法性的双重性质,仲裁员的行为也具有契约性和司法性,其中,对于违反契约义务的行为,仲裁员应当按照合同的无过错归责原则承担民事责任;而对于司法性行为,仲裁员享有民事责任豁免,除非其是故意滥用权力损害当事人的权益。
Different understanding of the nature of arbitration determines whether the responsibility of arbitrators is established or not. This paper agrees with the theory of arbitration and the arbitrator’s theory of limited liability. However, it also points out that in many countries applying the arbitrator’s limited liability doctrine, there is a lack of uniform understanding and standard of what the arbitrators should assume civil liability . This article starts with the basic theory of mixed theory and tries to set a standard for a unified arbitrator to bear the civil liability. That is, based on the double nature of the contractual and judicial nature of the arbitration, the arbitrator’s behavior is also contractual and judicial. Among them, The arbitrator shall bear civil liability for breach of contractual obligations in accordance with the principle of no fault attribution of the contract, whereas for judicial acts, the arbitrator shall be exempt from civil liability unless it deliberately misuses the power and damages the rights and interests of the parties concerned.