網路消費仲裁協議之執行力

The Enforceability of Online Consumer Arbitration Agreements

高啟中(Chi-Chung Kao)

《臺北大學法學論叢》 60期 (2006/12) Pp. 111-186

https://doi.org/10.6774/TULR.200612.0111

摘要

當事人間之仲裁協議是否得以執行，乃得否進行仲裁程序之先決條件。現今電子商務交易頻繁，網路消費契約條款中包含仲裁條款亦屢見不鮮。如何認定網路消費仲裁協議之執行力，有深入探討之必要。以美國法為例，聯邦仲裁法規定，爭端前仲裁協議，若未違背一般契約法原則，通常可被執行而進行仲裁，而所謂一般契約法原則，包括仲裁協議本身作為一種契約之契約效力，仲裁協議與主契約之分離原則，與公平原則。此種認定方式依賴不同法院對抽象法律概念作個案認定，容易產生不一致的結果，欠缺法的明確性與安定性。而歐盟法則明文禁止在消費契約中訂立爭端前仲裁條款，使此種仲裁協議無法被執行。在消費者自願訂立爭端前仲裁協議之情形，此種模式可能有立法過當的問題。況且若消費者無力負擔訴訟而欲尋求替代性爭端解決機制如仲裁時，只能透過簽訂爭端後仲裁協議之方式，此時消費者之處境並不一定比簽訂爭端前仲裁協議之模式更為有利。折衷方案是提供消費者公平的立足點，以利其決定是否簽訂仲裁協議。做法一、讓消費者有更多機會閱讀契約中的仲裁條款，並確保消費者有表達接受與否之權利；其二、政府應立法明文列舉不可執行的仲裁條款之具體事例。

關鍵字

仲裁協議 ； 執行力 ； 點選包裹契約 ； 瀏覽器包裹契約 ； 統一商法典 ； 統一電腦資訊交易法 ； 聯邦仲裁法 ； 公平原則 ； 美國仲裁協會消費者正當程序議定書 ； 歐盟不公平契約條款指令

並列摘要

The enforceability of arbitration agreements, particularly those contained in online consumer contracts, is a prerequisite of the commencement of online consumer arbitration. Under the American law, pre-dispute consumer arbitration agreements are generally enforceable in accordance with the FAA in line with the general principles of contract law. When determining the enforceability issue, the validity of an arbitration agreement, the severability doctrine, and the unconscionability doctrine are to be taken into account. However, the American approach may produce inconsistent results, as it depends on the application and interpretation of abstract legal principles by different courts on a case-by-case basis. The European rules, on the other hand, explicitly prohibit the incorporation of pre-dispute arbitration agreements in consumer contracts, thus rendering such arbitration agreements unenforceable. This may be unnecessarily excessive as under specific circumstances a consumer may actually consent to such a pre-dispute arbitration agreement. It may also make consumers more disadvantageous as the adjudication of a dispute may depend on the merchant’s willingness to submit to arbitration in a post-dispute context where litigation is unaffordable for the consumers. A pragmatic solution is to ensure that the arbitration agreements are fairer for the consumers in jurisdictions where they are not prohibited by law. To achieve this goal, two approaches may be adopted. Firstly to increase a consumer's opportunities to read and consent to a pre-dispute arbitration agreement by the industry's self-regulation regarding sufficient notice and information of arbitration in advance before a consumer entering into a contract. Secondly for the governments to establish uniform rules governing enforceability with concrete illustrations of the instances of unenforceable arbitration agreements.

並列關鍵字

arbitration agreement ； enforceability ； click-wrapped contract ； browser-wrapped contract ； UCC ； UCITA ； Federal Arbitration Act ； unconscionability ； AAA Consumer Protocol ； EU Unfair Contract Terms Directive

參考文獻

BLUM,BRIANA(2001).CONTRACTS: EXAMPLES & EXPLANATIONS.(2d ed., Aspen Law and Business).

BORN, GARY B(1994).INTERNATIONAL COMMERCIAL ARBITRATION IN THE UNITED STATES: COMMENTARY AND MATERIALS.(Kluwer Law and Taxation Publishers, Deventer).

FARNSWORTH, E. ALLAN(1999).CONTRACTS.(3d ed., Aspen Law and Business).

LEW, JULIAN D. M(2004).The Law Applicable to the Form and Substance of the Arbitration Clause, in IMPROVING THE EFFICIENCY OF ARBITRATION AGREEMENTS AND AWARDS: 40 YEARS OF APPLICATION OF THE NEW YORK CONVENTION.(Albert Jan van den Berg ed.).

LLEWELLTh, KARL N(1960).THE COMMON LAW TRADITION: DECIDING APPEALS.(Little Brown and Company).