重新仲裁制度运行的实证分析——以北京仲裁委员会重新仲裁的27个案件为样本

重新仲裁制度是仲裁司法监督的重要制度设计之一，但其实际运行状况确鲜为人知。本文以北京仲裁委员会经过重新仲裁的27个案件为样本，通过梳理这些案件的数量、时间分布、重裁原因、重裁效果等方面，总结司法监督机构对重新仲裁制度的运用规律，还原法律文本之外的真实的重新仲裁制度。其中，本文将对司法监督机构通知重新仲裁的原因作重点剖析，除了对法院引用次数较多的几种情形结合案例进行介绍外，本文进一步在每一种情形下又做了类型化的努力。此外，本文在总结北京仲裁委员会的实际做法的基础上，对仲裁机构如何处理重新组成仲裁庭、如何组织重裁程序、如何确定审理范围等问题进行了总结，并得出结论，北仲形成的一套做法是符合重裁制度的设立初衷和基本的程序正义的，值得其他仲裁机构加以借鉴。最后，本文回到问题的原点，分析为何重新仲裁制度会在实践中得到不同的理解和运用，并对改善这一状况提出了建议。

Re-arbitration is an important system design in the judicial supervision system, but its actual operating conditions rarely known. In this paper, the author takes Beijing Arbitration Commission＇s 27 cases as samples, through data statistics and analysis on numbers, time distribution, re-arbitrating reasons and its effects of the cases, summarizes how the court apply the re-arbitration system, and introduces how re-arbitration system run in practice. This paper will focus on the reasons the courts always cite for asking the arbitration tribunal for re- arbitration. Except the several typical conditions, the paper will further classify cases by re-arbitration reasons gave by the courts. In addition, this paper summarizes how the Beijing Arbitration Commission deal with re-constitute the arbitral tribunal, how to organize re-arbitration procedure, how the tribunal determine the hearing range of issues, and conclude that the BAC＇s practice is consistent with the original intention of the re-arbitration system as well as basic procedural justice, which is worth to learn for other arbitration institutions. Finally, going back to the essential of the problem, this paper analyzes why re-arbitration system would be different in practice, and gives recommendations to improve the situation.