美国“承认判决”制度管窥

A Glimpse of Recognition Judgment Institution in USA

我国仲裁机构根据网上个人信贷合同作出的先予裁决在执行中引发了两大争议问题:一是争议还没有发生,仲裁机关能否根据当事人的约定作出裁决;二是当事人能否放弃其接受通知以及进行答辩的权利。我国最高人民法院的司法批复对这两个问题给予否定回答。美国法院作出的承认判决类似我国仲裁机构作出的“先予裁决”,美国承认判决制度对上述两大争议问题持肯定态度;同时基于现代社会中保护消费者的目的,美国法院主张在涉及消费者的交易中,应该确保消费者放弃其程序权利的行为是有意、明知以及自愿的。承认判决制度是适应经济贸易发展的需要,在普通法长期实践的基础上,经由美国民事诉讼法的成文化发展而来的,其明确规定了法院可以在当事人争议发生前就根据协议作出判决,并就当事人放弃其程序权利的合宪性给予明确肯定。我国最高人民法院可借鉴美国承认判决制度法理,在未来对先予裁决司法解释的适用范围加以必要限制。

There are two major controversial issues in the enforcement of the pre-dispute arbitral award made by arbitration institution under the online personal credit contract in China: one is whether an arbitral award can be issued before a dispute even arises, the other is whether the parties to a dispute can effectively waive their rights to receive notification and reply. Chinese Supreme People’s Court gave a negative answer to these two questions. The confession judgment made by the U.S. courts is analogous to the pre-dispute arbitral awards made by Chinese arbitration institutions,. however, the recognition judgment system of the United States affirms the two controversial issues;based on the purpose of protecting consumers, it requires that the consumers should be consciously, knowingly, and voluntarily abandoning their procedural rights. Acknowledging the judgment institution, originates from adapting to the needs of economic and trade development, and based on the long-term practice of common law, the culture of American Civil Procedure Law. It clearly affirms a judgment rendered before the accruing of disputes and the relinquishment by the parties of their procedure rights. Chinese Supreme Court can find inspiration from the jurisprudence of American confession of judgment, and restrain the scope of its Judicial Reply.