论文部分内容阅读
2008年7月11日,山东省济南市中级人民法院拒绝承认与执行国际商会国际仲裁院仲裁庭就永宁公司案做出的裁决,理由之一便是该裁决违反了我国的公共政策。经过两级报请上级法院审查,最终最高人民法院肯定了“……国际商会仲裁院再对永宁公司与合资公司之间的租赁合同纠纷进行审理并裁决,侵犯了中国的司法主权和中国法院的司法管辖权。依据《承认及执行外国仲裁裁决公约》(以下简称”纽约公约“)第五条第一款(丙)项和第二款(乙)项之规定,应拒绝承认及执行该仲裁裁决。”本案仲裁申请人的申请理由之一便是“由于被申请人提起的第一起诉讼,合资公司的银行账户被无正当理由冻结,仓库被查封。
On July 11, 2008, one of the reasons why the Intermediate People’s Court of Jinan City, Shandong Province, refused to recognize and enforce the Arbitral Tribunal’s decision on Yongning Company was that the ruling violated our public policy. After two levels report to the higher court for review, the Supreme People’s Court finally confirmed that ”... the ICC arbitrated the adjudication and ruling on the lease contract dispute between Yongning Company and the joint venture company, violated China’s judicial sovereignty and the Chinese court’s Jurisdiction. Pursuant to Article 5, paragraphs 1 (c) and 2 (b), of the Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards (the “New York Convention”), the recognition and enforcement of The arbitration award. “” One of the reasons for the application for arbitration in this case is that "the bank account of the joint venture company was frozen without proper reasons due to the first lawsuit filed by the claimant.