한국중재학회지:중재연구 (Journal of Arbitration Studies)

한국중재학회 (The Korean Association of Arbitration Studies)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

On the Possibilities and Limitations of Arbitration Punishment

  • Zhu, Fuyong (Southwestern University of Political Science and Law)
  • 투고 : 2018.07.02
  • 심사 : 2018.08.28
  • 발행 : 2018.09.01
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

Independence and impartiality are the operating core of an arbitration disciplinary mechanism. Due to many factors, illegalities and improper acts in arbitration cases are facts of life in our country, and have greatly damaged the credibility of arbitration. It is necessary for us to perfect the operating mechanism of arbitration discipline from the four pluralistic progressive aspects of disciplining the cause externalization, disciplining the subject duality, the quasi-judicature of disciplinary procedures and the disciplining measures so that the populace can experience fairness and justice in every case. We should perfect the supporting measures such as the strict selection conditions and procedures of arbitrators, improving the quality of the arbitrator team, exploring the management mechanisms and strengthening the evaluation dynamic. An examination is a general investigation and evaluation so as to provide encouragement for being continually engaged as arbitrators, but it does not provide an objective basis of arbitration discipline. It is urgent to perfect the arbitration guarantee system on the basis of meeting the material needs of the arbitrators so as to enhance the sense of professional rank and honour of arbitration.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. Cai Hong, Liu Jialiang, Deng Xiaojing. Arbitration Law, Peking University Press 2011.
  2. Chen Wei. The Change and Promotion of the Way of Prosecution of Arbitration in Arbitration-Concurrently on the Circulation of Arbitration Responsibility and Criminal The establishment of liability, the Chinese Criminal Law magazine 2008 No. 7.
  3. Deng Ruiping, Yi Yan. A Brief Discussion on the System of Commercial Arbitration Responsibility, Journal of Chongqing University (Social Science Edition), No.1,2005.
  4. Edward S.Covent. The Constitution of the United States "Advanced Law"background, translated by qiang shigong, Sanlian book. 1996.
  5. EMMANUEL GAILLARD. International Arbitration Law: New Insight into the Duties of Arbitral Institutions. 8/2/2001N.Y.L.J. 3(col. 1).
  6. Enberthy v. Dymock[Z].1954.
  7. English Arbitration Act of 1996[Z].UK:1996.
  8. Fan Mingchao. The Law of Commercial Arbitration in the Perspective of Commercial Arbitration, Hebei Law in December 2009.
  9. HOMASCARBONNEAU. A Comment on the 1996 United Kingdom Arbitration Act. 22TUL. MAR.L.J, 1992.
  10. Hou Denghua. On the arbitrators of impartiality guarantee, contained in the Arbitration and Law No. 3, Law Press, 2002.
  11. Huang Jin. Private International Law and International Commercial Arbitration. Wuhan University Press, 1994.
  12. Huang Zhiyong. arbitrators of civil liability for comparative study, arbitration research second series.
  13. Liu Xiaohong. Determine the arbitrator responsibility Institutional Thinking of the System - Also Comment on the System of Arbitrators' Responsibility in China. Journal of East China University of Political Science and Law, 2007, (5).
  14. Liu xiaohong. The jurisprudence of determining the responsibility system of arbitrators - a review of the responsibility system of arbitrators in China. Journal of east China university of political science and law, 2007, (5).
  15. Peter M. Ryan. Counsels, Councils and Lunch: Preventing Abuse of the Power to Appoint Independent Counsels, University of Pennsylvania Law Review, Vol.144, No.6(jun, 1996).
  16. ROBERTMERKIN. Arbitration Act 1996.An Ann of a-ted Guide. LLP, 1996.
  17. Song Lianbin. Arbitration theory and practice, Hunan University Press, 2005.
  18. Wang Guofeng. Reflection and Integration of China's Arbitrator System, Administration and Law, No. 6, 2004.