仲裁员的民事赔偿责任之比较研究

Comparative Study on the Civil Compensation Liability of Arbitrator

仲裁员是否要对其在仲裁过程中实施的故意或过失行为而给仲裁当事人造成的损失承担仲裁责任?英美法系国家普遍强调仲裁员的“准法官”的特殊身份,赋予其仲裁责任豁免权;而大陆法系国家则认为仲裁员与当事人存在着某种合同关系,强调仲裁员的身份与一般技术人员一致之处,要求仲裁员承担仲裁责任。本文通过对两大法系在这个问题上的不同理论和实践的比较,提出了“有限的仲裁责任豁免论”,主张仲裁员在一定范围内和一定条件下可以享受仲裁责任豁免,但超出一定的条件和范围则应承担仲裁责任。并在此基础上,对我国现行《仲裁法》的有关规定作了肯定性的评析。

Whether or not, the arbitrator should be responsible for the arbitrate litigant's loss caused by the arbitrator's mistakes willfully or not, emphasizing the special identity, 'quasi-judge', of the arbitrator, the countries of England, America and France system generally endow the arbitrator with the immunity right of the arbitrate liability; while emphasizing the similarity with the common technical staffs, the countries of the big continent system think there is a kind of contractive relationship between the arbitrator and his litigants, so he should be responsible for the arbitrate liability. By comparing the different theories and practice on this problem, the article raises the 'limited immunity of the arbitrate liability' theory. It maintains that the arbitrator could enjoy the liability immunity within the certain limits, otherwise, he should be responsible for the arbitrate liability, on this base, the article also gives some positive valuations about the relative prescriptions in the law of Arbitration of our country.