法院對於國際商事仲裁之協力與監督－以我國與模範法、德國、法國及瑞士國際仲裁規範之比較為中心

對於從事國際商事交易之企業而言，仲裁不僅有專業、迅速、秘密或任意程序之優點，更有弱化他造「主場優勢」、確保仲裁成果流通性之私益，而對於國家而言，國際仲裁不僅有節省司法資源之優點，更有降低本國人參與對外貿易障礙、透過提供仲裁服務創造收益之公益，因此，如何藉由國際仲裁之立法與解釋，謀求上開利益之實現，實屬刻不容緩之課題。意識及此，本文乃以仲裁規範中「法院與仲裁間之關係」面向（即：法院對仲裁之「協力」與「監督」）為中心，檢討我國仲裁法上有關國際仲裁之規定，是否已達成其於1998年大幅修正時所揭櫫之「國際化與自由化」目標。透過我國法與模範法、德、法及瑞士法之比較分析，本文一面提示繼受外國法之可能立（修）法方向，一面嘗試運用「比較法解釋」方法提出我國法應有之解釋方式。

關鍵字

國際商事仲裁；比較法；仲裁協議；外國仲裁判斷；準據法；形式審查

並列摘要

Arbitration as a method of disputes resolution is of great benefit to enterprises involving in international commercial transactions. Except for the professionality, rapidity, secrecy and autonomy regarding the proceeding, international arbitration is conceived to avoid the ＂home advantage＂ and ensure the ＂circulation＂ of the result of procedure. On the other hand, international arbitration can not only help to save judicial resources, but also reduce business barriers which local entrepreneurs could face with. By providing services for arbitration a country could further generate revenue. In consequence hereof it's crucial to establish a suitable legal framework for international arbitration. In this regard, this article reviews the current Taiwanese Arbitration Law, which has undergone a profound reform in 1998 aiming at ＂internationalizing＂ and ＂liberalizing＂ arbitration regulations, and tries to find out if those legal political goals have been met, focusing on the aspect of ＂Court's Supervision and Assistance in Arbitration＂. By means of comparative legal study, this article argues that Taiwanese legislators should consider the transplantation of some foreign legal institutes and courts should interpret the law with due attention to international development.