| 摘要: | 中文摘要
兩岸間之經貿發展已經衝破人為之政治鴻溝，成為不可阻擋之勢，尤其
2010 年7 月簽署「兩岸經濟貿易架構協議（ECFA）」並於次年元月1 日具體
實施以後，可以預期在大陸經濟持續增長之情況下，一併帶動台灣經濟之大
幅成長，想必這一發展將會更為迅速。隨之而來之兩岸間原已客觀存在之民
商事糾紛，勢必不可避免地大幅增加，「仲裁」制度之完善以及如何有效利
用「仲裁協議」保障台商權益，以及有效地利用仲裁判斷作為兩岸間得以執
行之依據，為本文研究之重點課題。
仲裁因具有司法上當事人意思自主原則與契約自由原則而設之自主糾紛
解決機制。由當事人以仲裁協議授權仲裁人就彼此間之爭議作成判斷，以定
紛止爭。
台灣與大陸之仲裁法制均採「仲裁協議」為當事人提交仲裁之依據，亦為
仲裁機構以及仲裁庭可受理當事人爭議之依據。大陸之仲裁法及合同法均明
定仲裁應基於當事人雙方達成之仲裁協議申請或進行；另外，大陸之「台灣
同胞投資保護法」復規定當事人定有仲裁協議或合同中定有仲裁條款，方可
將爭議提交仲裁。
從事兩岸經貿投資之台商應深切瞭解仲裁協議之功能，也只有在經貿投資
與商業往來和契約條款中適當之訂立仲裁協議，才能在糾紛發生時，快速有
效地解決爭議。但兩岸間因長久以來之政治分離，以及不同之法域，在仲裁
人之任選、仲裁規則之運用、仲裁判斷之執行…等等雙方仍存在著諸多歧異。
因此本文研究之重點分為四個部分，〈一〉台灣與大陸地區仲裁法下之仲裁協
議內涵與運作、〈二〉仲裁協議與訴訟、調解、協商之差異及如何藉仲裁制度
作為迅速解決和保障台商權益、〈三〉、推動在大陸各重要城市成立「聯合仲
裁與調解機構」之可行性、〈四〉結論與建議。
Abstract
Taiwan-China economic and trade development has broken the
political divide between the people of each area. The trend has become
increasing unstoppable, especially after signing the “cross-strait economic
and trade framework agreement (ECFA)”, in July 2010. After Jan.1, the
specific implementation of this agreement will result in sustained
economic growth in the mainland, coexistent with a more rapid and
substantial lead in Taiwan’s economic growth, this increased economic
activity will substantially increase the disputes and use of the established
“arbitration” system between the two parties. The basis of the research is
to look at the key issues of how to improve the effectiveness of the
arbitration, to protect the rights of Taiwanese businesses, and to be able to
determine the true extent of the implementation of the ECFA.
Judicial arbitration is used because the parties are autonomous and are
free to contract a self designed method of dispute resolution. The parties
authorize an arbitrator to make a determination in any matter in which
there is a dispute.
Taiwan and mainland arbitration law will be incorporated into an
“arbitration agreement” to be the basis for both parties to arbitrate. The
Mainland and the contract law Arbitration Law, stipulates that the
arbitration should be based on both parties reaching an agreement on their
contracts or the decision of the arbitrator. In addition, due to the “Taiwan
Compatriots Investment Protection Law,” the parties should understand
the differences in government and law and make sure there is an
arbitration clause set in the contract before there is ever any dispute.
The parties involved in cross-strait trade and investment should be
keenly aware of the function of the arbitration in the quick and effective
resolution of disputes. Due to the long standing political differences, legal
jurisdictions, choice of arbitrators, and use of arbitration in each area,
there will still be many differences. Therefore, the focus of this paper is
divided into four parts:
(1) The content and execution of the “arbitration agreement” between
Taiwan and mainland China.
(2)The differences in litigation, mediation, and negotiation in order to
arrive at a speedy settlement while protecting the rights of Taiwanese
businesses.
(3)How to promote and entice all the major cities in the mainland to setup
“binding arbitration and mediation institutions”.
(4)Conclusion and recommendations.
Keywords:
Cross arbitration, ECFA mediation consultation, arbitrators, joint arbitration |
