国际航空仲裁制度研究——兼评1999年《蒙特利尔公约》第34条
|
摘要
中国航空仲裁存在适用范围不一致、临时仲裁承认与执行不对等、上海国际航空仲裁院的发展面临诸多挑战等问题。为健全多元化争议解决机制,有效发挥航空仲裁的原本价值,中国应统一和明确航空仲裁的范围,以上海国际航空仲裁院为依托,以航空临时仲裁为试点,结合国际社会的通行做法和实践,以开放的姿态认可中国国内航空临时仲裁的合法性,实行航空机构仲裁与临时仲裁"双轨制"。建议在初期通过一般性的仲裁机构解决争议,在中期倾向于航空临时仲裁,在后期提交专门的航空仲裁机构,从而分阶段、有重点和有秩序地推进中国航空仲裁制度的改革与发展。
China's aviation arbitration comes across many difficulties,such as,the scope of arbitration being inconsistent,recognition and enforcement of ad hoc arbitration being unequal and Shanghai International Aviation Court of Arbitration being faced with developmental challenges. In order to construct diversified dispute settlement mechanism and play a well function and effective role in original value of aviation arbitration,we should unify and define the arbitration range of aviation dispute by practices of international community,rely on Shanghai International Aviation Court of Arbitration,then roll out a new pilot project of aviation ad hoc arbitration with a open attitude,recognize the legitimacy of the aviation ad hoc arbitration and finally carry out the dual track of aviation ad hoc arbitration and aviation institutional arbitration. We could promote reform and development of China's aviation arbitration system by following steps. In the early,focusing on general institutional arbitration,in the mid term,toward aviation ad hoc arbitration and finally to specialized aviation institution arbitration.
China's aviation arbitration comes across many difficulties,such as,the scope of arbitration being inconsistent,recognition and enforcement of ad hoc arbitration being unequal and Shanghai International Aviation Court of Arbitration being faced with developmental challenges. In order to construct diversified dispute settlement mechanism and play a well function and effective role in original value of aviation arbitration,we should unify and define the arbitration range of aviation dispute by practices of international community,rely on Shanghai International Aviation Court of Arbitration,then roll out a new pilot project of aviation ad hoc arbitration with a open attitude,recognize the legitimacy of the aviation ad hoc arbitration and finally carry out the dual track of aviation ad hoc arbitration and aviation institutional arbitration. We could promote reform and development of China's aviation arbitration system by following steps. In the early,focusing on general institutional arbitration,in the mid term,toward aviation ad hoc arbitration and finally to specialized aviation institution arbitration.
引文
[1]杜丽君.对中国引进国际航空仲裁制度的思考[J].中国对外贸易,2015(6):82-85.
[2]李乾贵,郑囿君.航空知识产权纠纷可仲裁性探讨[J].北京航空航天大学学报(社会科学版),2012(4):23-28.
[3]王海燕.中国航空国际话语权再提升[N].解放日报,2014-08-29(2).
[4]加里·伯恩.国际仲裁:法律与实践[M].白麟,陈福勇,李汀洁,等,译.北京:商务印书馆,2015:13-22.
[5]WHALEN J.Arbitration of international cargo claims[J].Air and Space Law,2009(34):417-420.
[6]杨良宜,莫世杰,杨大明.仲裁法:从1996年英国仲裁法到国际商务仲裁[M].北京:法律出版社,2006:39.
[7]GEORGE N.TOMPKINS J.Liability rules applicable to international air transportation as developed by the courts in the United States:from Warsaw 1929-Montreal 1999[M].The Hague:Kluwer Law International,2014:211.
[8]中国民用航空局政策法规司.统一国际航空运输某些规则的公约精解[Z].北京:中国民用航空局政策法规司(内部发行),2005:221-222.
[9]JULIAN D.Contemporary problems in international arbitration[M].The Hague:Martinus Nijhorff Publishers,1987:59.
[10]刘晓红.国际商事仲裁协议的法理与实证研究[M].北京:商务印书馆,2005:28.
[11]VAN D.The York arbitration convention of 1958:towards a uniform judicial interpretation[M].The Hague:Kluwer Law and Taxation Publishers,1981:172.
[12]ELMAR G,RONALD S.Montreal convention annotation[M].The Hague:Kluwer Law International,2006.
[13]中国民用航空局.2015年民航行业发展统计公报[EB/OL].(2016-05-30)[2016-06-24].http://caac.gov.cn/XXGK/XXGK/TJSJ/t20160530_37643.html.
[14]上海国际航空仲裁院.上海国际航空仲裁院简介[EB/OL].(2014-08-28)[2016-06-24].http://www.cietac-sh.org/Aviation/aboutus.aspx?page=2.
[15]辛红.国际航空仲裁机制首次引入中国[EB/OL].(2014-08-30)[2016-06-28].http://legal.people.com.cn/n/2014/0830/c188502-25570232.Html.
[16]李时凯.2015年国际仲裁调查报告:国际仲裁的完善与创新[EB/OL].(2016-04-28)[2016-06-25].http://www.sjzzc.gov.cn/html/ziliao/lilun/2016/0428/2656.html.
[17]杨仁寿.法学方法论[M].北京:中国政法大学出版社,1999:105.
[18]VERSON N.ADR and international aviation disputes between states[J].ADR Bulletin,2003(6):78-65.
[19]JON B.Review of the dispute settlement mechanism under the international civil aviation organization:contradiction of political body adjudication[J].Journal of International Dispute Settlement,2013(4):97-109.
(1)所谓“棒球”仲裁是指在当事人陈述完毕后,各方将其“最终报价”(或“最好报价”)封在信封里并提交仲裁庭的程序。
(1)《蒙特利尔公约》第46条规定:第45条考虑的损害赔偿诉讼,必须在一个当事国的领土内,由原告选择,按照第33条规定向可以对缔约承运人提起诉讼的法院提起,或者向实际承运人住所地或者其主要营业地有管辖权的法院提起。
(2)即一项有效的仲裁协议应包括请求仲裁的意思表示、明确的仲裁事项和选定的仲裁委员会。
(1)1987年4月10日《最高人民法院关于执行中国加入〈承认与执行外国仲裁裁决公约〉的通知》规定的所谓的“契约性和非契约性商事法律关系”具体指由合同、侵权或者根据有关法律规定产生的经济上的权利义务关系,例如货物买卖、财产租赁、工程承包、加工承揽、技术转让、合资经营、合作经营、勘探开发自然资源、保险、信贷、劳务、代理、咨询服务和海上、民用航空、铁路、公路客货运输以及产品责任、环境污染、海上事故和所有权争议等,但不包括外国投资者与东道国政府之间的争端。
(2)所谓“边缘”性案件是指处于仲裁范围的框上,介于可仲裁与不可仲裁之间的案件。日本学者加藤一郎在论及法律规定的模糊性时提出了“框”的理论,认为法律规定犹如一个中心浓厚而愈向边缘愈稀薄的“框”,规范事项如在“框”中心,甚为明确,愈趋四周愈为模糊,以致人们分不清是属于框内还是框外。
[2]李乾贵,郑囿君.航空知识产权纠纷可仲裁性探讨[J].北京航空航天大学学报(社会科学版),2012(4):23-28.
[3]王海燕.中国航空国际话语权再提升[N].解放日报,2014-08-29(2).
[4]加里·伯恩.国际仲裁:法律与实践[M].白麟,陈福勇,李汀洁,等,译.北京:商务印书馆,2015:13-22.
[5]WHALEN J.Arbitration of international cargo claims[J].Air and Space Law,2009(34):417-420.
[6]杨良宜,莫世杰,杨大明.仲裁法:从1996年英国仲裁法到国际商务仲裁[M].北京:法律出版社,2006:39.
[7]GEORGE N.TOMPKINS J.Liability rules applicable to international air transportation as developed by the courts in the United States:from Warsaw 1929-Montreal 1999[M].The Hague:Kluwer Law International,2014:211.
[8]中国民用航空局政策法规司.统一国际航空运输某些规则的公约精解[Z].北京:中国民用航空局政策法规司(内部发行),2005:221-222.
[9]JULIAN D.Contemporary problems in international arbitration[M].The Hague:Martinus Nijhorff Publishers,1987:59.
[10]刘晓红.国际商事仲裁协议的法理与实证研究[M].北京:商务印书馆,2005:28.
[11]VAN D.The York arbitration convention of 1958:towards a uniform judicial interpretation[M].The Hague:Kluwer Law and Taxation Publishers,1981:172.
[12]ELMAR G,RONALD S.Montreal convention annotation[M].The Hague:Kluwer Law International,2006.
[13]中国民用航空局.2015年民航行业发展统计公报[EB/OL].(2016-05-30)[2016-06-24].http://caac.gov.cn/XXGK/XXGK/TJSJ/t20160530_37643.html.
[14]上海国际航空仲裁院.上海国际航空仲裁院简介[EB/OL].(2014-08-28)[2016-06-24].http://www.cietac-sh.org/Aviation/aboutus.aspx?page=2.
[15]辛红.国际航空仲裁机制首次引入中国[EB/OL].(2014-08-30)[2016-06-28].http://legal.people.com.cn/n/2014/0830/c188502-25570232.Html.
[16]李时凯.2015年国际仲裁调查报告:国际仲裁的完善与创新[EB/OL].(2016-04-28)[2016-06-25].http://www.sjzzc.gov.cn/html/ziliao/lilun/2016/0428/2656.html.
[17]杨仁寿.法学方法论[M].北京:中国政法大学出版社,1999:105.
[18]VERSON N.ADR and international aviation disputes between states[J].ADR Bulletin,2003(6):78-65.
[19]JON B.Review of the dispute settlement mechanism under the international civil aviation organization:contradiction of political body adjudication[J].Journal of International Dispute Settlement,2013(4):97-109.
(1)所谓“棒球”仲裁是指在当事人陈述完毕后,各方将其“最终报价”(或“最好报价”)封在信封里并提交仲裁庭的程序。
(1)《蒙特利尔公约》第46条规定:第45条考虑的损害赔偿诉讼,必须在一个当事国的领土内,由原告选择,按照第33条规定向可以对缔约承运人提起诉讼的法院提起,或者向实际承运人住所地或者其主要营业地有管辖权的法院提起。
(2)即一项有效的仲裁协议应包括请求仲裁的意思表示、明确的仲裁事项和选定的仲裁委员会。
(1)1987年4月10日《最高人民法院关于执行中国加入〈承认与执行外国仲裁裁决公约〉的通知》规定的所谓的“契约性和非契约性商事法律关系”具体指由合同、侵权或者根据有关法律规定产生的经济上的权利义务关系,例如货物买卖、财产租赁、工程承包、加工承揽、技术转让、合资经营、合作经营、勘探开发自然资源、保险、信贷、劳务、代理、咨询服务和海上、民用航空、铁路、公路客货运输以及产品责任、环境污染、海上事故和所有权争议等,但不包括外国投资者与东道国政府之间的争端。
(2)所谓“边缘”性案件是指处于仲裁范围的框上,介于可仲裁与不可仲裁之间的案件。日本学者加藤一郎在论及法律规定的模糊性时提出了“框”的理论,认为法律规定犹如一个中心浓厚而愈向边缘愈稀薄的“框”,规范事项如在“框”中心,甚为明确,愈趋四周愈为模糊,以致人们分不清是属于框内还是框外。