论文部分内容阅读
近期,我国某海事法院受理了一起申请承认外国仲裁裁决案,该案最主要的法律问题在于:仲裁庭是在缺员的情况下完成仲裁并作出裁决的,对此裁决我国法院是否应予以承认?实际上,缺员仲裁庭裁决的效力问题也是国际法学界和国际商事仲裁界数十年来争论的焦点,至今尚无定论。本文深入剖析了围绕缺员仲裁庭裁决效力问题之“均衡说”及“效力说”的理论纷争以及国际实践中的分歧,并对我国法院应如何看待缺员仲裁庭裁决的效力提出了详细的对策建议。本文主张应以“均衡说”为主,“效力说”为辅,认为除非得到明确授权,仲裁庭不得在缺员状态下继续程序及作出裁决,否则对其裁决应不予承认和执行。
Recently, a maritime court in our country accepted an application for recognition of a foreign arbitration award. The most important legal issue in the case is that the arbitration tribunal completed the arbitration and ruled in the absence of a member and ruled whether our court should recognize it In fact, the issue of the validity of the arbitration tribunals’ rulings is also the focus of decades of controversy among international jurisprudence and the international commercial arbitration community, and so far there is no conclusion. This article analyzes in depth the theoretical disputes surrounding the adjudication effect of the missing tribunal and the disagreements in international practice, and analyzes how the courts of our country view the validity of the adjudication of the missing tribunal Proposed detailed countermeasures and suggestions. This paper advocates that the arbitration tribunal should not continue the procedure and make decisions under the absence of any member unless it is subject to the principle of “balance theory ” and “validity ”, otherwise, the award should not be recognized And execute.