DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Recognition or Enforcement of Domestic Arbitral Awards Under the German Civil Procedure Act

독일민사소송법상 국내중재판정의 승인 및 집행 -「독일민사소송법」 제1060조 규정의 내용을 중심으로-

  • 성준호 (성균관대학교 법학연구원)
  • Received : 2020.05.10
  • Accepted : 2020.05.31
  • Published : 2020.06.30

Abstract

The "arbitration" system resolves disputes through judgments on rights relations or claims between disputed parties by judging by private trial, but it does not have organizational and material bases to execute the contents of these judgments. Therefore, unless the parties succeed in voluntarily surrendering to the results of the arbitration award, the implementation of the award will be accomplished by the enforcement of the assistance of the National Court. However, unlike the court's ruling, the arbitration tribunal does not generate enforcement power from the judgment itself, and it must be filed with the court for execution. In this regard, Germany provides for arbitration proceedings in the Civil Procedure Act Volume 10. In particular, Article 1060 governs the approval and enforcement of domestic arbitral awards. Accordingly, the procedure for declaring the feasibility of domestic arbitration proceedings and the execution of forced execution are commenced. Regarding the enforceable declaration of a domestic arbitral award, it differs from the simpler process requirements compared to the procedure in a foreign arbitral award, and usually has the same effect as a final judgment between the parties without a separate approval procedure. However, the arbitration award does not constitute an enforceable power that can be implemented, but is enforced through the national court's declaration procedure. However, if there is a ground for cancellation as provided for in Article 1059 (2) of the German Civil Procedure Act, the arbitral award is canceled and the application for enforcement is dismissed.

Keywords

References

  1. 이시윤, 신민사소송법 [제12판], 박영사, 2018.
  2. 목영준/최승재, 상사중재법[개정판], 박영사, 2018.
  3. 강대성, 민사집행법, 탑북스, 2014.
  4. 전병서, 민사집행법, 박영사, 2019.
  5. 김용길, "우리나라에서 외국중재판정의 승인과 집행에 관한 고찰", 중재연구 제20권 제3호, 한국중재학회, 2010.
  6. 김학기, "중재판정의 승인과 집행", 원광법학 제27권 제4호, 원광대학교 법학연구소, 2011.
  7. 석광현, "외국중재판정의 승인.집행제도의 개선방안", 국제사법연구 제16호, 한국국제사법학회, 2010.
  8. 석광현, "2016년 중재법에 따른 국내중재판정의 효력, 취소와 승인.집행에 관한 법리의 변화", 한양대학교 법학연구소 2017 법학논총 Vol.34 No.1
  9. 성준호, "중재판정의 효력 - 중재법 제35조의 의미와 역할에 관한 논의 중심으로 -", 선진상사법률연구 제85호, 법무부, 2019.
  10. 성준호, "독일민사소송법상 외국중재판정의 승인 및 집행- 독일민사소송법 제1061조를 중심으로 -", 중재연구 제29권 제2호, 한국중재학회, 2019.
  11. 엄덕수, "중재판정에 기한 강제집행절차의 문제점", 한국민사집행법학회 2009 民事執行法硏究: 韓國民事執行法學會誌Vol.5 No.-
  12. 최안식, "국내 중재판정의 집행절차에 관한 연구", 가천법학 제7권 제3호, 가천대학교 법학연구소, 2014.
  13. 최안식, "중재제도의 활성화를 위한 연구", 圓光法學제26권 제3호, 원광대학교 법학연구소, 2010.
  14. 법무부, 민사소송법번역집(독일), 법무부심의관실, 2020.
  15. 법무부, 세계중재법규 제1권, 박영사, 2014.
  16. Boor, Felix, Der aufgehobene auslandische Schiedsspruch als „rechtliches nullum"? Eine kritische Analyse auf der Grundlage des Verfassungs- und Volkerrechts, Schriften zum Offentlichen Recht (SOR), Band 1321, 2016.
  17. Lachmann, Jens-Peter, Handbuch fur die Schiedsgerichtspraxis, 3., vollig uberarbeitete Auflage, Verlag OttoSchmidt, 2008.
  18. Munchener Kommentar zur Zivilprozessordnung (ZPO), 4. Auflage, C.H.BECK, 2012.
  19. Musielak, Hans-Joachim/Stadler, Astrid/Voit, Wolfgang/Weth, Stephan, Kommentar zur Zivilprozessordnung: ZPO mit Gerichtsverfassungsgesetz, 12. Auflage, Vahlen, 2015.
  20. Prutting, Hanns/Gehrlein, Markus, ZPO Kommentar, 7. Auflage, Hermann Luchterhand Verlag, 2015.
  21. Saenger, Ingo, Handkommentar Zivilprozessordnung, 7. Auflage, Nomos, 2017.
  22. Schwab, Karl Heinz/Walter, Gerhard, Schiedsgerichtsbarkeit, 7. Auflage, Helbing Lichtenhahn Verlag, 2005.
  23. Stein, Friedrich/Jonas, Martin, Kommentar zur Zivilprozessordnung (ZPO), 23. Auflage 2014.
  24. Wilske / Markert, Beck'scher Online-Kommentar ZPO, 35. Edition, Verlag C.H.BECK Munchen, 2020.