仲裁案件所涉部分事实经常与法院审理案件事实重叠。由于仲裁案件受理依据为仲裁协议,该重叠部分依据不同的协议,法院不能拒绝受理。由两个不同的审理机构审理,对同一事实进行审理得出的结论,可能出现差异。这种差异合法与否,在司法实践中颇有争议。本文试图以实例为依据,以实证法分析该争议的处理原则。 Some of the facts involved in arbitration cases often overlap factually with court cases. Since the arbitration case is accepted on the basis of an arbitration agreement, the overlapping part of the agreement can not be rejected by the court according to different agreements. Proceedings conducted by two different tribunals may lead to differences in the conclusion of the trial of the same facts. Whether this kind of difference is legal or not is quite controversial in judicial practice. This article tries to analyze the handling principle of the dispute based on examples and empirical method.