国际商事仲裁裁决司法监督新论

在当今国际商事仲裁裁决合意化及其执行国际化的语境下，现行国际商事仲裁裁决司法监督制度存在着混淆决定型裁决与合意型裁决的司法监督机理、区别对待国内与涉外商事仲裁裁决司法监督，不注重案外人合法权益之及时保护等问题。国际商事仲裁在程序正义供给方面无法与法院审判程序相媲美，仲裁裁决拘束当事人的正当性基础也与确定判决截然不同，国际商事仲裁裁决应当仅具备基于明示或者推定的仲裁确定效。仲裁确定效理论的适用有助于在妥善处理国际司法协助与国家主权独立、意思自治与公益兼顾的基础上，对现行司法监督体系进行整体反思，重构帘严相济的国际商喜仲赫赫凄司法肾督体系．

In the context that parties＇ consensuses play a more important role in international commercial arbitration and arbitral awards＇ enforcement become more international, there are some problems in judicial supervision system of arbitral awards： confusing the judicial supervision principle deterministic awards and consensus-based awards, discriminating domestic and foreign commercial arbitration award, paying no enough attention to the timely protection of legitimate interests of the third party. For international commercial arbitration can not be comparable with the court proceedings in procedural justice and the legitimacy for the parties to be bound by arbitral awards is different from court decisions, international commercial arbitral awards shall only have the express or presumed determine effectiveness. Arbitration determination effectiveness doctrine has an advantage in properly handling the relationship between international judicial assistance and national sovereign independence and coordinating private interests with public interests. On this basis, this paper tries to make a holistic reflection on the existing judicial supervision system.