| 摘要: |
| 由于不以传统的双方事先达成仲裁合意作为确定管辖权的基础，初现于20世纪80年代末的“无默契仲裁”模式自产生起至今备受争议，如何完善该模式造成的管辖权不当扩大弊端是消解其争议的务实之举。以广泛适用该模式的国际投资争端解决中心的实践为切入点进行考察发现，国际投资争端解决中心公约及仲裁规则对确立管辖权的法律适用规则的缺失和管辖权异议处理程序上的不足将对“无默契仲裁”模式下管辖权的确立产生不良影响，应通过直接在国际投资争端解决中心仲裁规则中明确相关法律适用规则、建立管辖权先行审查制度以及提倡东道国在双边条约中参考2012年美国BIT范本第30条制定法律适用规则予以完善。 |
| 关键词: 无默契仲裁 管辖权 法律适用 管辖权先行审查制度 |
| DOI： |
|
| 基金项目:福建省教育厅2014年人文社会科学B类课题“国际私法视域下国际法法理学具象研究”(项目编号:JBS14035)。 |
|
| A Study on the Jurisdiction of Arbitration without Privity |
| PENG Si-bin |
|
| Abstract: |
| Arbitration without privity which appeared in the l980’s especially in ICSID incurred extensive controversies because of the absence of privity of both parties. Therefore it was considered to be lack of deficient theoretical origin. However, the development of international investment disputes settlement practices proves the demand of this arbitration itself. It is better to study the problems which this mode of arbitration would bring forth especially on the jurisdiction which influences the backward proceeding dramatically rather than critically denied the existence of the arbitration without privity. The deletion of the provision of applicable law rules by the arbitrator judged on the jurisdiction and the tedious objection procedure should be changed. The concrete applicable rules and new pre-trial procedure about the objection to the jurisdiction are presented in the article. |
| Key words: arbitration without privity jurisdiction applicable law rules pre-trial procedure |
