争议评审比较研究及在我国的适用建议

争议评审是近年来新兴起的一种替代性争议解决方式,并逐渐在我国建设工程领域得到应用,成为新兴的争议解决热点问题。由于其规则灵活,能显著降低争议解决的成本,在业界广受好评。鉴于我国在争议评审方面的法律和规则不甚完善,相关实践亦较为少见,本文结合国外的相关规则设置和实践经验,以比较研究的方法分析了争议评审中的一系列重要法律和实践问题,包括争议评审意见的法律效力、争议评审组的组成与成员选择、争议评审中的程序规则设置、争议评审与其他争议解决方式的关系、争议评审的司法审查等。通过对这一系列问题在外国实践中的表现和我国相关发展之间的比较,我们得出的结论是,受到对争议评审制度的理解不够、实践经验的缺乏乃至整个建设工程领域的法律和现实环境的局限,我国现有的争议评审制度无论是在合同至上、当事人主导和专家权威性等理念的落实上,还是在具体的细节规则设置上,都仍有欠缺。因此,本文力图通过对国外先进经验的研习,并将其中的诸多问题与我国的具体环境相结合的方式,为建设工程争议解决领域的相关人士提供一些参考,希望能以此文为促进我国争议评审事业的发展贡献绵薄之力。

Dispute review is a method of alternative dispute resolution that arises recently. This method is frequently applied in the construction industry and becomes a hot topic in dispute resolution area. It is highly respected because of its flexible rules and low-cost effects. Inspired by the concerns that the legislation and rules regulating dispute review are not advanced and the relevant practices are not common in China, the author reviews the legislations, rules and practical experiences in foreign jurisdictions, adopts a comparative law approach, and analyzes the following legal and practical issues in dispute review, including： the legal effects of dispute review opinions, the composition of dispute review board and the selection of board members, the procedural rules of dispute review, the relationship between dispute review and other methods of alternative dispute resolution, and the judicial review of judicial review etc. The author compares the performances in foreign jurisdictions and in China and concludes that our current system of dispute review are still not fully developed in many major aspects, including the recognition of the binding force of the contract, party autonomy and the power of the experts, as well as the design of detailed rules. This may partly due to the absence of a thorough understanding of the dispute review system, the lack of practical experiences in this area, and the underdeveloped legal and practical environment in China＇s construction industry. This paper reviews the foreign experience and discusses the possibilities to apply the key points from foreign experience in problems under the Chinese contexts. In doing so the author aims to provide references and guidance to the Chinese scholars and practitioners in the construction dispute review practice and contribute to the development of dispute review system in China.