《仲裁法（修订）》征求意见稿：有力的初稿和有待改进的三个方面

Solid Draft and Three Aspects for Further Improvement

On August 10, 2021, our director Zhang Yulin PhD attended the discussion meeting of CAAL as a Board Member and presented his comments on the Draft Amended Arbitration Law (for Consultation).

The three aspects of improvements could include scope of application, whether China is a Model Law state, and the parallel relationship between arbitration and court.

2021年8月10日，北京霖理律师事务所张玉林博士作为中国仲裁法学研究会的理事出席了CAAL的讨论会议，并且发表了关于《仲裁法（修订）》（征求意见稿）的意见。他谈到该修订稿是有力的草案，但在适用范围、中国是不是“示范法国家”，以及仲裁与法院的平行关系三个方面，仍有待进一步改进。

His PPT is attached for reference.

张玉林博士的PPT附于文末以供读者参考。

议题一：适用范围

Scope of Application 

In the discussion, Dr. Zhang suggested that following the Civil Code, a provision on scope of application should be included in the Amended Arbitration Law. The provision will permit China to subject arbitration activities within its territory to its law. It may read as follows: Arbitration matters within the territory of the People’s Republic of China will be governed under this Law. Where the law of the PRC has other provisions, such other provisions will apply. This will enable the country to manage the three jurisdictions (Hong Kong SAR, Macao SAR, and Taiwan) in the future under its legal framework.

在讨论中，张玉林博士认为，在《民法典》颁布之后，应在《仲裁法（修订稿）》中加入一项关于适用范围的规定。该项规定将允许新仲裁法在中国领域内调整仲裁活动。这将使中国未来能够在其法律框架内管理三个司法管辖区（香港、澳门和台湾）。具体条文可以是：在中华人民共和国领域内的仲裁活动适用本法。中华人民共和国法律另有规定的，依照其规定。

The parties may, by agreement, choose applicable law to their contract, according to the principle of party autonomy on the choice of law. It is noted that parties may choose Chinese law to apply to their contract and hence arbitration law may be subject to express choice of parties under the party autonomy principle in the future. Particularly in BRI countries, where the parties choose Chinese law to govern their contractual relationship, the arbitration clause will also be subject to Chinese law, and the arbitration award may finally be subject to Chinese law in the enforcement proceedings, pursuant to Article V 1 (a) and (e) of the New York Convention.

同时，当事人可在合同中选择适用中国法律，因此仲裁法未来可根据当事人意思自治原则，根据当事人明示选择，适用之。特别是一带一路沿线国家，当当事人选择中国法律调整合同关系时，仲裁法可以适用有关合同和争议解决。根据《纽约公约》第5条第1款（a）项和（e）项，仲裁条款也会遵守中国法律的规定，仲裁裁决最终可能在执行程序中需要遵守中国法律。

议题二：中国是不是“示范法国家”？

Whether China is a Model Law Country? 

To answer this, Dr. Zhang offers the idea that foreign related disputes shall be subject to the chapter of rules of the Model Law, which can be attached as an attachment of the new Arbitration Law, with some additional provisions. The provision may read like this: Arbitration of foreign related disputes shall be subject to the rules of the UNCITRAL Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration (2006) (“Model Law”) which is attached to this Law. Where the Model Law has no provisions, the provisions of the other chapters of this Law shall apply; where there are any discrepancies between the provisions of the Model Law and the other provisions of this Law, the provisions of the Model Law will govern, provided that the provisions under the chapter of General Principles under this Law must be observed.

为了回答这一问题，张博士提出，涉外纠纷将由《示范法》规则一章来规定，《示范法》可作为未来《仲裁法》的附件随附，并附有一些附加条款。具体条文：涉外事务的纠纷的仲裁应遵守本法所附《联合国国际商事仲裁示范法》（2006年）的规则。《示范法》没有规定的，适用本法其他章节的规定；《示范法》和本法的其他规定不同的，以《示范法》的规定为准，但必须遵守本法总则一章中的规定。

To make foreign related arbitration in the Mainland subject to the provisions of the Model Law will bring China into the same level of rules of law under the UNCITRAL Model Law with 118 legal jurisdictions that have adopted the Model Law and are called as “Model Law Jurisdictions”. Like Hong Kong SAR and Macao SAR, the Mainland will be another jurisdiction that adopts the Model Law, and will be at par with these Model Law jurisdictions in the international business and arbitral community. This will definitely make China’s friends circle be expanded to reach the Model Law community with shared rules and values under the UNCITRAL Model Law.

将内地的涉外仲裁置于《示范法》的规定约束之下，将会让中国与《联合国贸易法委员会示范法》的法律规则处于同一水平。目前有118个司法管辖区采用了《示范法》，被称为“示范法司法管辖区”。与香港和澳门一样，内地将会成为另一适用《示范法》的司法管辖区，并将与国际商界和仲裁界的这些《示范法》司法管辖区相媲美。这无疑将扩大中国的朋友圈，使之步入到《示范法》的业界，分享《联合国贸易法委员会示范法》规定的共同规则和价值观。

Dr. Zhang also noted that as a permanent member of the five security council of the United Nations and a leading role in the developing world, this move will permit China to shoulder more responsibility and accountability in terms of business security and peace through international arbitration in the foreign related areas in China. The move will for sure help enhance China’s strategic position in the legal and arbitral world amidst the complex international affairs at the present time.

张博士同样指出，作为联合国安理会五个常任理事国之一和发展中国家的领导角色，这一举措将使中国能够通过在中国涉外领域的国际仲裁，在商业安全与和平方面承担更多的责任和义务。此举无疑将有助于加强中国在当下复杂的国际形势下在法律和仲裁领域的战略定位。

议题三：仲裁和法院的平行关系

The Relationship between Arbitration and the Court

As one commentator well put it, arbitration is a dispute resolution method parallel to the court system. As is well-known, arbitration is exclusive to the court jurisdiction, hence, the court should not re-open merits of the case at the post award stage. The reasons are varied, but most important include the following:

正如一位评论员所说的那样，仲裁与法院系统平行同为纠纷解决方法。众所周知，仲裁是排他性的管辖权，排除法院的管辖权，因此，法院不应在裁决后阶段重新审理案件的案情。原因多种多样，但最重要的包括：

• Arbitration is an autonomous procedure of dispute resolution, including party’s agreement or choice of arbitration, the due procedure of claims, defense, appointment of arbitrators, hearing and deliberation, and final award. It is a private or 民间 dispute resolution not using public money to reach a legally enforceable decision. The court supports such legally enforceable decision by giving enforcement force to the arbitration awards. There would be a waste of public funds if the arbitration awards are to be re-opened and the merits will be re-visited by the court judges.
  

• 仲裁是意思自治的解决纠纷程序，包括当事人同意或选择仲裁、正当的索赔程序、辩护、指定仲裁员、听证和审议以及最终裁决。这是一种私人或者民间的解决纠纷方式，不利用公帑进行程序直至达成有法律效力的裁决。法院通过强制执行仲裁裁决以支持这一有法律效力的裁决。如果仲裁裁决进入重新实体审理，并由法官重新审查案情，将会浪费公共资金。

• International customary rules and practice show that arbitration will be checked primarily from the court on the due process of the procedure. Article 5 of the New York Convention focuses on the procedural defects that will permit the court to deny enforcement of the award where there is proof of defects of the case, and public policy grounds should be used in a sparingly limited manner.

• 国际惯例规则和实践表明，法院主要对仲裁的正当程序进行检核。《纽约公约》第5条着重于程序上的缺陷，若存在证据证明这些缺陷，将允许法院拒绝执行仲裁裁决，而公共政策的理由应以有限的方式加以使用。

• The court judges are already very busy with the large case load of the court in civil, commercial, administrative and criminal matters. Opening arbitration cases to the courts will only put more burden on the court system when the arbitrators who are impartial and experienced persons have considered the matter and given their decisions.
  

• 中国法院法官们每年处理几千万的民事、商事、行政和刑事案件，非常繁忙。通过仲裁程序中经过公道的有经验的仲裁员解决了的案件，无需再去法院进行实体审理，无需再去增加法院的负担。

• Similarly, only when procedural defects exist, the court may, upon request, proceed with the invalidation procedure. The re-arbitration process should be used in limited circumstances to avoid the re-opening of the procedure of dispute resolution, wasting resources and time. After all, the parties choose to arbitrate their disputes, and they will take the risks of their choice of arbitration and undertake the consequences of such choice. If the losing party is not happy, it may choose the court to deal with its future disputes in the future.

• 同样，只有存在程序缺陷时，法院才可以根据当事人请求进行撤销程序。重新仲裁程序应在有限的条件下使用，以避免重新开启争议解决程序，浪费资源和时间。毕竟，当事人自愿选择仲裁纠纷，而且他们承担选择仲裁的风险以及承担这一选择的后果。如果败诉方不满意，他未来可选择法院解决纠纷。

• As arbitration has the advantage of one final award, it remains in parallel competition to the court process in dispute resolution, particularly in cross border matters, due to the success of the New York Convention and the UNCITRAL Model Law.

• 仲裁有一裁终局的优势，由于《纽约公约》和《联合国国际贸易法委员会国际商事仲裁示范法》的成功，它在解决争端方面，特别是在跨国界事项上，与法院程序保持着的是一种平行存在的争议解决。

For the above reasons, it is worthwhile to let the arbitrators do their case, and the court may adopt a “light-touch” approach on supervisory role in terms of due process during the arbitration process or at post the award stage, or in Chinese, 无为而治 could be a useful thinking towards the system of arbitration. The grant of the legal force by the new Arbitration Law on the arbitration agreement and the arbitration awards, in line with the two primary functions of the New York Convention, will be sufficient for the growth of the arbitration field in China in the future.

基于上述理由，值得注意的是，在仲裁中让仲裁员审理案件，而法院可在正当程序方面对仲裁程序进行事中和事后的监督，行使“淡墨”的末位监督的做法。用中文来说，相当于“无为而治”，这在程序上可以是对仲裁制度的有益思考。根据《纽约公约》，法院有两项基本功能，即在仲裁协议和仲裁裁决这两方面支持和监督仲裁。新《仲裁法》如果在仲裁协议和仲裁裁决两方面赋予法律的支持和监督的功能，将足以促进中国仲裁领域的未来发展。

Arbitration is international (or cross-border) from its birth, and should be dealt with as an international matter in China in relation to foreign related matters, by using widely recognized international rules and customs, such as fully aligning with the New York Convention and the UNCTIRAL Model Law. This will enable China to match with the global trend for international commercial arbitration.

仲裁自始就是国际性的，或者是跨境的仲裁，在中国作为一项涉外事务的国际仲裁事务，我们须采用公认的国际规则和惯例，与《纽约公约》和《联合国国际商事仲裁示范法》完全保持一致，这将符合中国当下的国际大势所趋。