透過您的圖書館登入
IP:44.202.209.105
  • 學位論文

兩岸投資保障協議下的商務糾紛解決機制-以商務仲裁為核心

The Dispute Settlement Mechanism for Cross-strait Investment-Focused on Commercial Arbitration

指導教授 : 張五岳
共同指導教授 : 吳光明

摘要


本研究在兩岸簽署投資保障協議後,兩岸在商務糾紛解決機制上 的成熟以及進步,以及在簽署此協議前後,採用之糾紛解決機制不同 之比較以及整理。在綜觀國際間的糾紛解決機制後,運用於兩岸的可 行性以及效果。 隨著兩岸經貿往來的迅速發展,兩岸間的商務糾紛發生比例也隨 之增加。海峽兩岸投資保障和促進協議於 2012 年 8 月簽署後,依據兩岸投 保協議「商務糾紛的當事雙方可選擇兩岸的仲裁機構及當事雙方同意的仲裁 地點」之規定,臺商和中國大陸國營企業或其他私人公司發生糾紛,當事人 「可選擇兩岸仲裁機構」、「仲裁地點可選第三地」。 本文主要探討兩岸商務糾紛的機制,在投保協議簽訂前後的差 別,以及著重在兩岸投保協議中的仲裁部分,探討商務仲裁的部分, 關於仲裁之既判力及承認等問題。而簽訂了投保協議後,在執行面上 可能面臨哪些問題,以及簽訂後實質上的效益成果。 本文的研究成果與主要結論為: 第一、投保協議為兩岸特殊關係上,對於商務糾紛解決之窗口,兩岸 的投保協議,確實比起國際間其他的投保協議來的緊密且深層。從人 民對政府間的溝通,到政府對政府間的溝通,連成一氣的溝通管道, 在純粹的投保協議外,更增加了,僅存於兩岸間的溝通管道與方式。 第二、台灣對於大陸之法律、行政機構之運行,不了解部分仍多,此 部分多為民間從事法律相關之職人士研究居多,然而兩岸關係緊密, 因由政府主導研究,以補足建立政策時之不足。

關鍵字

兩岸 商務仲裁

並列摘要


In this study, after the signing of Cross-Strait Bilateral Investment Protection and Promotion Agreement, the two sides in the dispute settlement mechanism of the business mature and progress, as well as before and after the signing of this agreement, the use of dispute mechanisms to resolve differences between comparative and finishing. Looking after international dispute resolution mechanism, applied to both sides of the feasibility and effect. More and more commercial disputes occurred with the rapid development of economics and trade cross the Strait. After entering into the Cross-Strait Bilateral Investment Protection and Promotion Agreement, the Straits Exchange Foundation immediately published that: the Cross-Strait Bilateral Investment Protection and Promotion Agreement provides that The parties to a commercial dispute may designate an arbitration institution of either side of the Strait and agree on the seat of arbitration. Under such regime , in the event where a dispute arises between a Taiwanese company and a Chinese state-owned enterprise may designate an arbitration institution of either side of the Strait and agree on the seat of arbitration located in a third place. This paper discusses the regime of cross-strait commercial disputes, the difference before and after the Cross-Strait Bilateral Investment Protection and Promotion Agreement, as well as focus on cross-strait insurance agreement arbitration section explores some of commercial arbitration, on res judicata and recognition of arbitration and other issues. The signing of the Cross-Strait Bilateral Investment Protection and Promotion Agreement, which may face problems, as well as the results of the signing of substantial benefit in the implementation of the surface. Results of this study and the main conclusions are: First, the Cross-Strait Bilateral Investment Protection and Promotion Agreement on cross-strait special relationship is the Solution window for commercial disputes, both sides of the Cross-Strait Bilateral Investment Protection and Promotion Agreement, indeed compared to other international insurance agreement to close and deep. From people of communication between the government, the government of intergovernmental communication, develop together communication channels, outside of pure agreement, adds, exists only in the channels of communication between the two sides and ways. Second, since the operation mode for Taiwan legal and administrative institutions of the continent it is still not understood that government agencies have not yet specializing in the laws of the continent, but in close cross-strait relations, the government should be leading the other side of the law more in-depth studies to complement when you create policies to be more perfect.

並列關鍵字

Cross-strait Commercial Arbitration

參考文獻


陳柏奇,〈中國國有企業之公司治理研究-契約失效問題〉,淡江大學中國大陸研究所經濟貿易組碩士論文,2005 年6 月。
陳緯人,〈國際商務仲裁證據法則與其所涉仲裁判斷之承認及執行〉,國立台灣大學法律學院法律學研究所碩士論文,2009 年7 月。
伍偉華,〈經台灣法院裁定認可確定之大陸民事確定裁判及仲裁判斷是否有既判力?-最高法院 96 年度臺上字第 2531 號判決、 97 年度臺上字第 2376 號判決之分析〉,《國立台灣大學法學論叢》,第38 卷第4 期,2009 年,頁385-442。
陳希佳,〈後投保協議時代的兩岸商務仲裁-以兩岸投保協議第十四條第四款前段之解釋與適用為中心〉,《臺北大學法學論叢》,第92 期,2014 年,頁137-185。
邱錦添、陳新華,〈兩岸法院對仲裁判斷之認可與執行〉,《軍法專刊》, 第58 卷第6 期,2012 年,頁45-64。

延伸閱讀