摘要
对于执行法院依据《纽约公约》第五条第二款(乙)项对外国仲裁裁决进行公共政策审查时是否有权重审案件实体内容这一问题,以英国为代表的诸多法域采取了限缩审查模式,严格限制法院重审。以2023年审结的Alexander v.Alstom案为代表的涉腐纠纷凸显出限缩审查模式的风险。法国法院采取的全面审查模式与英国高等法院曾提出的折衷审查模式从不同角度为该问题提供了理论镜鉴。探索、批判与整合两种模式的认识与实践,借鉴国际法协会2002年新德里大会国际商事仲裁委员会《以“公共政策”拒绝执行国际仲裁裁决的最终报告》的建议,限缩审查模式也许可以得到修正与完善。中国法应逐步提供对这一问题的明确指引,并在不重审案件实体内容的原则下设定必要的例外条件,在支持仲裁与反腐败的公共政策之间寻找合理的平衡点,进一步提高我国商事纠纷仲裁国际化程度。
In light of whether the enforcement courts have the power to review the merit of the cases according to Article V(2)(b)of the New York Convention,many jurisdictions adopt the minimal review approach represented by the English courts,strictly limiting the review.The corruption-related disputes represented by Alexander v.Alstom case concluded in 2023 reflect the risks of the minimal review approach.The maximal review approach adopted by the French court and the contextual review approach proposed by the England and Wales High Court provide theoretical references for this issue from different perspectives.The minimal review approach could be amended and improved by exploring,criticizing and integrating the understanding and practice of these two approaches and drawing lessons from Final Report on Public Policy as a Bar to Enforcement of International Arbitral Awards by International Law Association New Delhi Conference(2002)Committee on International Commercial Arbitration.Chinese law should gradually provide clear guidance on this issue,set necessary exceptional circumstances under the principle of not reviewing the merit,balance the relationship between the public policy of promoting arbitration and anti-corruption,and further improve the degree of internationalization of commercial arbitration in China.
出处
《商事仲裁与调解》
2024年第2期79-98,共20页
Commercial Arbitration & Mediation
关键词
《纽约公约》
公共政策
司法审查模式
反腐败
New York Convention
public policy
judicial review approach
anti-corruption
作者简介
王文琛,华东政法大学国际法学院硕士研究生
