论仲裁裁决不予执行制度的完善路径——以《仲裁法(修订意见稿)》相关修改为背景

The Improvement Path of the Arbitration Non-enforcement System——On the Amendment of the A rbitration Law(Amendment)(Draft for Comments)

由于我国的仲裁司法审查制度存在着公正与效率、立法价值与实践价值、主体特定性以及扩张性等内在冲突,导致司法审查制度在适用当中存在着重复审查问题,为了解决这一问题,《仲裁法(修订意见稿)》删除了不予执行制度的有关规定,并允许案外人以提起异议或者诉讼的方式进行救济,但是直接移除不予执行制度的相关规定可能在避免重复审查的同时带来案外人与当事人执行阶段的救济不平等、执行阶段审查主体模糊不清等问题,并且给予案外人提起异议的救济方式与现行的不予执行制度在效用上并没有太大的区别。鉴于此,我国立法应当在厘清两种仲裁司法审查方式的基础之上对不予执行制度进行进一步的完善,从而发挥两种制度的优势。

Due to the inherent conflicts between justice and efficiency,legislative and practical values,subject speificity and expansiveness of China's judicial review system,there is a problem of repeated review in the application of the judicial review system,and in order to solve this problem,《The Arbitration Law of the People's Republic of China(Amendment)(Draft for Public Comments)》removes the relevant provisions of the non-enforcement system,and However,the direct removal of the relevant provisions of the non-enforcement system may bring about problems such as inequality of remedies between outsiders and parties at the enforcement stage and ambiguity of review subjects at the enforcement stage while avoiding repeated reviews,and the remedy of filing objections by outsiders is not very different from the existing non-enforcement system in terms of effectiveness,in view of which Our legislation should further improve the non-enforcement system on the basis of clarifying the.two types of judicial review of arbitration,so that the advantages of both systems can be brought into play.