大陸仲裁判斷在臺灣之認可與執行－兼論最高法院104年度台上字第33號民事判決

The Recognition and Enforcement of China's Arbitral Awards in Taiwan- Also Commenting on the (104) Tai-Shang on No.33 Decision Rendered by the Supreme Court

吳光明(Kuang-Ming Wu)

《高大法學論叢》 13卷1期 (2017/09) Pp. 61-65+67-109+111-123

摘要

仲裁制度之發展，源於仲裁機制之效率性、合理性以及協調性。然而，相對完整之承認與執行外國仲裁判斷法律制度與仲裁判斷在世界範圍內之可執行性，才能為國際商務仲裁創造良好之外部條件，提供制度上與法律上之保障。另一方面， 海峽兩岸經濟合作架構協議（Economic Cooperative Framework Agreement ，簡稱ECFA）於2010年簽署後，海峽兩岸經貿交流所引起之兩岸經貿糾紛最好方式，則為商務仲裁。惟我國仲裁法第47 條第1 項，對外國仲裁之定義，似乎不適用於大陸。2015 年2 月12 日，仲裁法第47 條第2 項之修正：「外國仲裁判斷，經聲請法院裁定承認後，於當事人間，與法院之確定判決有同一效力，並得為執行名義。」，但臺灣地區與大陸地區人民關係條例（以下簡稱「兩岸關係條例」）第74 條並未配合修正。該條仍規定：「在大陸地區作成之民事確定裁判、民事仲裁判斷，不違背臺灣地區公共秩序或善良風俗者，得聲請法院裁定認可。前項經法院裁定認可之裁判或判斷，以給付為內容者，得為執行名義。（第2 項）」條文中將「民事確定裁判」及「民事仲裁判斷」並列。此一規定模式，是否意味臺灣如不承認大陸地區判決之既判力，亦可推論亦不承認大陸仲裁判斷之既判力。因此，大陸仲裁判斷在臺灣之認可與執行問題，值得我們深入探討。

關鍵字

仲裁制度 ； 仲裁判斷 ； 兩岸經濟合作架構協議 ； 既判力 ； 兩岸關係條例

並列摘要

Arbitration is the most formalized alternative to the court adjudication of disputes. An arbitration award is not self-executing. On the one hand, The New York Convention plays a central role in the enforcement of the international arbitral awards in Taiwan courts. On the other hand, Economic Cooperative Framework Agreement (ECFA) has signed between R.O.C. and P. R.O.C. in 2010. Commercial arbitration is used most often in the Economic and trade frictions of the cross-strait relations However, The Arbitration Law of ROC Article 47 item 1 are provided: ＂A foreign arbitral award is an arbitral award which is issued outside the territory of the Republic of China or issued pursuant to foreign laws within the territory of the Republic of China.＂ The Arbitration Law of ROC was amended in 12. 2. 2015. It was amended that a foreign arbitral award, after an application for recognition has been granted by the court, shall be binding on the parties and have the same force as a final judgment of a court, and is enforceable. Act Governing Relations between the People of the Taiwan Area and the Mainland Area (2015. 06. 17 Amended). This Act is specially enacted for the purposes of ensuring the security and public welfare in the Taiwan Area, regulating dealings between the peoples of the Taiwan Area and the Mainland Area, and handling legal matters arising wherefrom before national unification. With regard to matters not provided for in this Act, the provisions of other relevant laws and regulations shall apply. Article 74 are provided: ＂To the extent that an irrevocable civil ruling or judgment, or arbitral award rendered in the Mainland Area is not contrary to the public order or good morals of the Taiwan Area, an application may be filed with a court for a ruling to recognize it. Where any ruling or judgment, or award recognized by a court's ruling as referred to in the preceding paragraph requires performance, it may serve as a writ of execution. The preceding two paragraphs shall not apply until the time when for any irrevocable civil ruling or judgment, or arbitral award rendered in the Taiwan Area, an application may be filed with a court of the Mainland Area for a ruling to recognize it, or it may serve as a writ of execution in the Mainland Area.＂ Therefore, it deserved to study on the recognition and enforcement of China's arbitral awards in Taiwan.

並列關鍵字

arbitration system ； arbitral awards ； Economic Cooperative Framework Agreement ； arbitral award be binding and final ； Act Governing Relations between the People of the Taiwan Area and the Mainland Area

參考文獻

王志誠(2012)。仲裁判斷之既判力、執行力及爭點效－我國司法實務見解之發展動向及分析。仲裁季刊。96，104-125。

伍偉華(2009)。經臺灣法院裁定認可確定之大陸仲裁判斷是否有既判力？—最高法院 97 年度臺上字第2258 號判決等見解之分析。仲裁季刊。88，66-86。

伍偉華(2013)。專案仲裁之效力—兼論對兩岸經貿之影響。月旦民商法雜誌。41，76-95。

吳光明(2004)。仲裁法理論與判決研究。臺北=Taipei:翰蘆=HanLu。

吳光明()。