美国Lapine.V.Kyocera案件评析

下载PDF

导出

摘要仲裁当事人协议扩大司法审查的范围是美国仲裁发展的新动向。Lapine.v.Kyocera案件作为典型案件之一,引发了美国理论界和司法界广泛的关注。持肯定和否定立场的法院和学者都提出了自己的理论根据。联系我国仲裁发展的现状和世界仲裁立法的趋势,我国不宜承认仲裁当事人协议扩大权。

作者胡秀娟

机构地区武汉理工大学文法学院

出处《理论月刊》 2007年第7期151-154,共4页 Theory Monthly

关键词司法审查意思自治实体审查

参考文献12

1Kristen M.Blankley,Be More Specific,Setton Hall Circuit Review[Vol.2:391 2006],at 414.
2Contractual Expansion of the Scope of Judicial Review of Arbitration Awards under the Federal Arbitration Act,St John's Law Review,summer 2002 by Murry,Cynthia A.http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3923/is_200207/ai_n9109001.
3Andreas Lowenfeld,Can arbitration co-exist with Judicial Review? Currents,September 1998,p11(publishedby the AAA).
4societe de Diseno v.Societe Mendes,Paris,1re Ch.Civ.,October 27,1994,Rev.Arb.1995 263,note Level.
5Kristen M.Blankley,Be More Specific,Setton Hall Circuit Review[Vol.2:391 2006],395.
6Richmond Journal of Global Lawand Business,AYMPOSIUM TRANSCRIPT “Grounding the FAA:Judicial Review of InternationalArbitration” Lapine v.Kyocera http://www.student.richmond.edu/～rjglb/spring1999.pdf
7左海聪,胡永攀.美国仲裁当事人协议扩大司法审查探析[J].上海政法学院学报（法治论丛）,2006,21(2):123-128. 被引量：3
8丁颖.论当事人对仲裁裁决司法审查范围的合意变更[J].法学评论,2006,24(5):37-43. 被引量：6
9黄进,宋连斌,徐前权.仲裁法学[M].北京:中国政法大学出版社,2002.
109th Cir 2003 341 F3d 987.

1Pieter Sanders, Quo Vadis Arbitration? - Sixty Years of Arbitration Practice - A Comparative Study,Kluwer Law International, 1999, pp. 320 - 322.
2Pieter Sanders, Quo Vadis Arbitration? - Sixty Years of Arbitration Practice - A Comparative Study,Kluwer Law International, 1999 ,p. 323.
3James B. Hamlin, Contractual Alteration of the Scope of Judicial Review: The US Experience, 15 J. Int'l Arb. 47(1998).
4Carlos J. Bianchi, Significant Recent Developments in U. S. Arbitration Law, 19 J. Inti Arb. 349 (2002).
5584 F. Supp. 240 (S.D.N.Y. 1984).
664 F. 3d 993 (5th Cir. 1995).
7130 F. 3d 884 (9th Cir. 1997).
8IOF. Supp. 2d53 (D. Mass. 1998).
9935 F. 2d 1501, 1505 (7th Cir. 1991).
10148 F. 3d 992 (8th Cir. 1998).

理论月刊

2007年第7期

内容加载中请稍等...