仲裁裁决在香港地区承认与执行中的公共政策问题  

Public Policy in the Recognition and Enforcement of Arbitral Awards in Hong Kong

作　　者：陈锦淞 

机构地区：[1]深圳大学法学院

出　　处：《商事仲裁与调解》2022年第1期54-70,共17页Commercial Arbitration & Mediation

摘　　要：通过分析典型案例可以看出,为了处理好“裁决作出地和承认执行地”与“仲裁和诉讼”这两组关系,中国香港法院在审判中坚持终局性原则、国际礼让原则和狭义解释原则,只对仲裁裁决是否违反执行地的公共政策进行审查,同时强调不能使承认与执行阶段成为败诉方争取第二次辩论的机会,并在审判中尽量避免对裁决认定的事实问题进行审理。在具体案件审理中,中国香港法院重视程序正义及其与裁决作出地的文化差异,并试图在程序正义与仲裁目的之间寻求平衡。在中国香港高度重视程序正义的背景下,面对涉港案件,仲裁庭和仲裁当事人都应对仲裁程序的正当性予以重视。在承认与执行阶段,内地法院应当向中国香港法院学习,尽量避免对公共政策进行抽象解释并在裁决中写明推理过程。By analyzing typical cases,it can be seen that in order to deal with the relationship between"the place where the award was made and the place of enforcement"and the relationship"arbitration and award"as well as to balance the relationship between"arbitration and litigation",the Hong Kong courts have adhered to the principles of finality,international comity and narrow interpretation,only reviewing whether the arbitral award violates the public policy of the place of enforcement,while emphasizing that the losing party cannot seek a second argument at the recognition and enforcement stage,and avoiding as much as possible the trial of factual issues found in the arbitration.In specific cases,Hong Kong courts attach importance to procedural justice,respect the cultural differences between Hong Kong and the place of enforcement,and try to find a balance between procedural justice and the purpose of arbitration.Under the background that Hong Kong attaches great importance to procedural justice,both the arbitral tribunal and the parties should pay attention to the due process of arbitration in cases involving Hong Kong.At the recognition and enforcement stage,the mainland courts should learn from Hong Kong and try to avoid abstract interpretations of public policy and write down the reasoning process in their decisions.

关 键 词：中国香港 公共政策 承认与执行 

分 类 号：D925.7[政治法律—诉讼法学]