政大機構典藏-National Chengchi University Institutional Repository(NCCUR):Item 140.119/153350

政大典藏 > College of Law > Graduate Institute of Law and Interdisciplinary Studies > Theses > Item 140.119/153350

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/153350

Title:	仲裁判斷救濟方式之探討-以我國與瑞士法之比較為中心 A Study of the Post-Award Challenges of Arbitration - A Comparative Study of R.O.C and Swiss Law
Authors:	羅芸祁 Lo, Yun-Chi
Contributors:	顏玉明 Yan, Anna 羅芸祁 Lo, Yun-Chi
Keywords:	仲裁法瑞士國際私法瑞士聯邦民事訴訟法國際仲裁仲裁制度瑞士仲裁制度仲裁協議仲裁判斷撤銷仲裁判斷之事由審查仲裁判斷撤銷仲裁判斷救濟權拋棄 Arbitration Law Swiss Private International Law（PILA） Bundesgesetz über das Internationale Privatrecht（IPRG) Swiss Civil Procedure Code（CPC） Schweizerische Zivilprozessordnung（Zivilprozessordnung, ZPO） International Arbitration Arbitration System The Swiss arbitration law system Arbitration Agreement Arbitral Award Grounds for Annulment of Arbitral Award Review of Arbitral Award（Revision） Waiver of the Right to Seek Annulment of Arbitral Award Remedies（Verzicht auf Rechtsmittel）
Date:	2024
Issue Date:	2024-09-04 14:52:13 (UTC+8)
Abstract:	仲裁作為紛爭解決機制，有使當事人能迅速有效解決當事人間之紛爭的優點，仲裁人依據當事人訂定之仲裁協議，經過仲裁程序之審理，最終作成與法院所作之確定判決具有相同效力之仲裁判斷以解決當事人間之紛爭、確定當事人間之權利義務關係。同於法院判決，仲裁判斷對於仲裁程序當事人具有既判力，然仲裁程序究與一般訴訟程序不同，審理之密度亦不同，自應賦予當事人就仲裁判斷向國家司法機關提起救濟之權利，以完善保障當事人之權利。我國於民國50 年制定「商務仲裁條例」，經民國71年及民國75 年兩次修正後，又於民國87 年參考1985年聯合國國際貿易委員會頒布之「國際商務仲裁模範法」（UNCITRAL Model Law）進行大規模修訂，最後於民國87 年5 月通過，並更名為「仲裁法」，嗣我國仲裁法雖經幾次修正，均無重大調整，惟隨國際商業貿易之發展，我國仲裁法之規定可能已不符國際仲裁法規之潮流，而有參考其他國家仲裁法規制定之必要。我國仲裁法對於仲裁判斷之救濟方式僅有「撤銷仲裁判斷」、「更正仲裁判斷」二種途徑，我國仲裁法第 40 條明文規定得提起撤銷仲裁判斷之法定事由共計 11 款，當事人得基於仲裁判斷之作成程序有瑕疵、仲裁協議無效等事由，向管轄法院聲請撤銷仲裁判斷，依我國仲裁法第43條規定，如經法院撤銷仲裁判斷，當事人得就該爭議事項提起訴訟。當仲裁判斷有書寫或計算等明顯錯誤，作出該有瑕疵之仲裁判斷的仲裁庭可以依當事人之聲請或自行就仲裁判斷為更正。瑞士仲裁法之制度，係區分國際仲裁即國內仲裁，於瑞士國際私法（PILA）及瑞士聯邦民事訴訟法（CPC）分別就國際仲裁即國內仲裁予以規範，並以瑞士聯邦法院判例為見解之補充，瑞士法就仲裁判斷之救濟方式有「撤銷仲裁判斷」、「更正及補充仲裁判斷」及「審查仲裁判斷」，可供我國仲裁法修正之參考。2023年瑞士國際私法（PILA）第190條第2項及2023年瑞士聯邦民事訴訟法（CPC）第393條分別規定撤銷仲裁判斷之法定事由，包括仲裁程序瑕疵、仲裁庭作出越權判斷、仲裁判斷違法瑞士公共秩序等事由，瑞士聯邦法院如認為當事人向其聲請撤銷仲裁判斷有理由，依2023年瑞士聯邦民事訴訟法（CPC）第394條將會撤銷仲裁判斷之一部或全部，並將之發回仲裁庭，命仲裁庭於一定時間內作出更正或補充。當仲裁判斷有書寫或計算等明顯錯誤，當事人得向仲裁庭聲請更正仲裁判斷；當仲裁庭作出仲裁判斷對於當事人向仲裁庭聲請審理之爭議有為脫漏判斷時，當事人得向仲裁庭聲請補充仲裁判斷。當仲裁程序當事人如在仲裁庭作出仲裁判斷後，發現與仲裁爭議事實有關之新事實、新證據或仲裁程序當事人經法院判決犯有刑事重罪或輕罪，且前開事實將會影響仲裁判斷，當事人得向瑞士聯邦法院聲請審查仲裁判斷，如瑞士聯邦法院認為當事人之主張有理由，會將該仲裁判斷發回原仲裁庭重新審理。鑑於瑞士為國際商業貿易當事人選擇之仲裁地，瑞士之仲裁法規亦隨著仲裁之蓬勃發展，配合瑞士聯邦法院判例之見解，修正瑞士國際私法（PILA）及瑞士聯邦民事訴訟法（CPC），賦予仲裁程序當事人更大程度之自由，為有利於我國仲裁制度乃至於我國國際仲裁之發展，爰參考瑞士仲裁法制關於仲裁判斷救濟方式之規範，期能供我國仲裁法修法之參考。 Arbitration, as a dispute resolution mechanism, offers parties the advantage of swiftly and effectively resolving disputes between them. Arbitrators, based on the arbitration agreement established by the parties, conduct proceedings and ultimately issue an arbitral award that holds the same enforceability as a final court judgment to resolve disputes and determine the rights and obligations of the parties. Similar to court judgments, arbitral awards are res judicata for the parties involved in the arbitration. However, since arbitration procedures differ from general litigation procedures, including the intensity of review, it is necessary to grant parties the right to seek remedies from state judicial authorities concerning arbitral awards to ensure comprehensive protection of their rights. The "Commercial Arbitration Ordinance." was enacted in the Republic of China (ROC) in 1961, amended twice in 1982 and 1986, and then underwent a significant revision in 1998, drawing reference from the 1985 "UNCITRAL Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration." This revision was passed in May 1998, renaming it as the "Arbitration Law of Republic of China." Despite several amendments since then, there have been no substantial adjustments. However, with the development of international commercial trade, the provisions of Arbitration Law of Republic of China may no longer align with the trends in international arbitration law, necessitating the consideration of arbitration laws from other countries. The Arbitration Law of Republic of China provides only two methods of Post-Award Challenges of Arbitration: "set aside the arbitral award" and "correction of the arbitral award." Article 40 of The Arbitration Law of Republic of China expressly stipulates 11 statutory grounds for filing for annulment of an arbitral award. Parties may petition the competent court for annulment based on defects in the arbitration proceedings, invalidity of the arbitration agreement, and other grounds. According to Article 43 of The Arbitration Law of Republic of China, if the court annuls the arbitral award, the parties may litigate the dispute. When the arbitral award contains obvious errors such as writing or calculation mistakes, the arbitral tribunal that issued the flawed award may correct it upon the parties' request or on its own initiative. The Swiss arbitration law’s legal framework distinguishes between international and domestic arbitration, governed respectively by the Swiss Private International Law Act (PILA) and the Swiss Civil Procedure Code (CPC), supplemented by the interpretations of the Swiss Federal Supreme Court. Swiss law offers several methods of remedies for arbitral awards, including " set aside the arbitral award," "correction and supplementation of the arbitral award," and "review of the arbitral award," which could serve as references for amending Arbitration Law of Republic of China. Article 190, Paragraph 2 of the 2023 Swiss Private International Law Act (PILA) and Article 393 of the 2023 Swiss Civil Procedure Code (CPC) respectively stipulate the statutory grounds for annulment of an arbitral award, including defects in the arbitration proceedings, arbitral tribunal exceeding its authority, and violation of Swiss public policy. If the Swiss Federal Supreme Court finds that the parties' petition for annulment is justified, it will annul part or all of the arbitral award according to Article 394 of the 2023 Swiss Civil Procedure Code (CPC) and remand it to the arbitral tribunal for correction or supplementation within a specified period. When the arbitral award contains obvious errors such as writing or calculation mistakes, parties may request the arbitral tribunal to correct the award; if the arbitral tribunal's award fails to address disputes submitted for arbitration, parties may request the arbitral tribunal to supplement the award. If, after the arbitral award is issued, parties discover new facts or evidence related to the arbitration dispute, or if a party is convicted of a serious crime, and such facts would affect the arbitral award, parties may petition the Swiss Federal Supreme Court for a review of the arbitral award. If the Swiss Federal Supreme Court finds the parties' claims justified, it will remand the arbitral award to the original arbitral tribunal for re-examination. Given that Switzerland is a preferred arbitration venue for international commercial parties, Swiss arbitration regulations have evolved with the flourishing development of arbitration. Accompanied by the interpretations of the Swiss Federal Supreme Court, amendments to the Swiss Private International Law Act (PILA) and the Swiss Civil Procedure Code (CPC) have provided arbitration parties with greater procedural autonomy. To benefit Republic of China's arbitration system and the development of international arbitration in Taiwan, it is recommended to refer to Swiss arbitration laws regarding remedies for arbitral awards as a reference for revising Arbitration Law of Republic of China.
Reference:	一、中文文獻（一）專書 1.吳嘉生，國際商務仲裁理論與實務，初版，2013年。 2.許士宦，口述講義民事訴訟法（上），第2版， 2021年。 3.陳煥文，國際仲裁法專論，1994 年4 月。 4.楊崇森等，仲裁法新論，2002年。 5.劉鐵錚等，瑞士新國際私法之研究， 1991年10月。（二）期刊文章 1.李貴英，英國、美國、瑞士、新加坡、紐西蘭與我國仲裁法制之比較研究，103 年度國際經貿政策研究中心計畫（WTO 暨RTA 中心計畫）子計畫二：短期性議題（9），2014年10月。 2.張嘉真、賴育佑，對於仲裁地在臺灣適用外國仲裁規則之仲裁判斷提起撤銷仲裁判斷訴訟的容許性，萬國法律，第 249 期，頁58-71 ，2023年06月。 3.伍偉華，仲裁判斷背於公序良俗之司法審查－兼論公共政策與強行法規之司法審查，中原財經法學，第 51 期，頁127-222，2023年12月。 4.陳瑋佑，法院對於國際商事仲裁之協力與監督 ──以我國與模範法、德國、法國及瑞士國際仲裁規範之比較為中心，臺北大學法學論叢，第一○八期，頁253-331，2018年12月。 5.藍瀛芳，仲裁條款的自主性與仲裁庭自行審認管轄異議的權能，月旦法學雜誌，第 90 期，頁222-235，2002年11月。 6.藍瀛芳，仲裁制度的形成與其發展的過程，仲裁，第 75 期，頁1-32，2005年08月。 7.藍瀛芳，違法判斷的積極救濟途徑（上），仲裁專論，第 90 期，頁2-43，2010年04月30日。 8.藍瀛芳，違法判斷的積極救濟途徑（中），仲裁專論，第 91 期，頁2-42，2010年09月15日。 9.藍瀛芳，違法判斷的積極救濟途徑（下），仲裁專論，第 92 期，頁23-43 ，2010年12月31日。 10.藍瀛芳，仲裁的保全程序，仲裁專論，第 94 期，頁39-80，2011年12月。 11.藍瀛芳，是否應承認非機構仲裁，仲裁季刊，第 102 期，92-106 頁，2015年12月。 12.陳希佳，探討我國法院關於非機構（AD HOC）仲裁判斷的裁判－臺灣高等法院 99 年度非抗字第 122 號民事裁定及其可能的影響，仲裁季刊，第 93 期，頁26-41 ，2011年9月。二、英文文獻（一）專書 1.Sandra Synková (2013), Courts' Inquiry into Arbitral Jurisdiction at the Pre-Award Stage: A Comparative Analysis of the English, German and Swiss Legal Order. 2.Elliott Geisinger, Nathalie Voser, Angelina M. Petti (2013), International Arbitration in Switzerland: A Handbook for Practitioners. （二）期刊文章 1.Isabelle Wildhaber Alexandra Johnson, Arbitrating Labor Disputes in Switzerland, JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION (2010). 2.Nathalie Voser, New Rules on Domestic Arbitration in Switzerland Overview of Most Important Changes to the Concordat and Comparison with Chapter 12 PILA, ASA BULLETIN 4/2010 (DECEMBER), 754 (2010). 3.Samuel, A. The New Swiss Private International Law Act,The International and Comparative Law Quarterly, 37(3), 681–695. (1988). 4.Hye-Jeong Do, Study on Challenging the Arbitral Award before an Arbitration-Friendly Swiss Court, 30 J. ARB. STUD, 161 (2020). 5.Antonio Rigozzi Elisabeth Leimbacher, The Swiss Supreme Court Refits the Frigates—ICC Award Set Aside After More than Thirteen Years, JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION (2010). 6.Nora Krausz, Waiver of Appeal to the Swiss Federal Tribunal: Recent Evolution of the Case Law and Compatibility with ECHR, Article 6, JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION (2011). 7.Phillip Landolt, The Inconvenience of Principle: Separability and Competence-Competence, JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION (2013). 8.Switzerland: Arbitration. Washington, D.C., Law Library of Congress. (1987). 三、法條規範（一）台灣 1.仲裁法 2.民事訴訟法 3.刑法（二）瑞士 1.瑞士國際聯邦仲裁合約（International Concordat on Arbitration of 1969） 2.瑞士聯邦民事訴訟法（Swiss Federal Civil Procedure Code） 3.瑞士國際私法（PRIVATE International Law Act） 4.瑞士刑法典（Swiss Criminal Code of 21 December 1937，Status as of 3 March 2020） 5.瑞士聯邦憲法（Federal Constitution of the Swiss Confederation） 6.瑞士民法典（Swiss Civil Code） 7.瑞士規則（Swiss Rules of International Arbitration，Swiss Rules） 8.瑞士聯邦法院程序法（Bundesgesetz über das Bundesgericht，BGG）（三）國際 1.1985年聯合國國際商務仲裁模範法（UNCITRAL Model Law） 2.2006年聯合國國際商務仲裁模範法（UNCITRAL Model Law） 3.聯合國國際貿易法委員會仲裁規則（UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules） 4.1958年紐約公約（United Nations Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards） 5.IBA Guidelines on CONFLICTS of Interest in International Arbitration 6.歐洲人權公約（European Convention on Human Right） 7.United Nations International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights 8.UNCITRAL Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration 9.UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules 10.ICC Arbitration Rules 四、網路資源 1.我國非1958年聯合國外國判斷的承認與執行公約之會員國，見：https://www.newyorkconvention.org/contracting-states （最後瀏覽日：2024.7.22） 2.瑞士聯邦法律公開平台（Fedlex The publication platform for federal law）2025年瑞士國際私法（PILA）版本，載於：https://reurl.cc/oRlMaq （最後瀏覽日2024.7.18） 3.瑞士聯邦法律公開平台（Fedlex The publication platform for federal law）2025年瑞士聯邦民事訴訟法（CPC）版本，載於：https://reurl.cc/ezqK6b （最後瀏覽日2024.7.18）
Description:	碩士國立政治大學法律科際整合研究所 109652003
Source URI:	http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0109652003
Data Type:	thesis
Appears in Collections:	[Graduate Institute of Law and Interdisciplinary Studies] Theses

Files in This Item:

File	Description	Size	Format
200301.pdf		2857Kb	Adobe PDF	0	View/Open

社群 sharing

Loading...