兩岸仲裁制度之比較研究-兼論ECFA後以台商權益為中心

CCUR > College of Law > Department of Law & Graduate Institute of Law > thesis > Item 987654321/20205

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://irlib.pccu.edu.tw/handle/987654321/20205

Title:	兩岸仲裁制度之比較研究-兼論ECFA後以台商權益為中心
Authors:	陳台光
Contributors:	法律學研究所碩士在職專班
Keywords:	兩岸仲裁 ECFA 調解協商仲裁員聯合仲裁
Date:	2010
Issue Date:	2011-11-07 12:38:37 (UTC+8)
Abstract:	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
Appears in Collections:	[Department of Law & Graduate Institute of Law ] thesis

Files in This Item:

File	Description	Size	Format
index.html		0Kb	HTML	313	View/Open

Loading...