我国体育仲裁司法监督模式选择  

To Select China's Judicial Supervision Model of Sport Arbitration

作　　者：郑璐[1] 张冲[1] 

机构地区：[1]西安体育学院,西安710068

出　　处：《价值工程》2012年第18期290-291,共2页Value Engineering

基　　金：西安体育学院院管资助项目;项目编号:qn2010-25

摘　　要：从体育仲裁的性质入手,认为体育仲裁制度契约性、准司法性和独立性的特点要求建立体育仲裁司法监督模式;司法监督有利于实现体育仲裁所追求的公正、效率的价值目标;在司法监督模式上,国内学者有着"全面监督论"和"程序监督论"两种不同的理论观点,通过对上述理论的分析,笔者认为它们之间的对立不是绝对的,两者可以在承认当事人意思自治的前提下对是否决定进行法院实体审查这一重要问题达成契合,因此体育仲裁司法监督模式应采取法院原则上不监督体育仲裁实体但允许当事人协议扩大监督权的设计,是切合我国司法制度实际的理想模式。Starting from the nature of sports arbitration, this paper thinks that the features of sports arbitration system, contractual nature, quasi- judicial nature and independence, require establishing sports arbitration judicial supervision mode. Judicial supervision is conducive to realize the justice, efficiency value goal of sports arbitration. In the judicial supervision mode, domestic scholars have two kinds of different theoretical perspectives, ＂comprehensive supervision theory＂ and ＂program supervision theory＂. Based on analyzing the above theory, the author thinks that the opposition between the two is not absolute, both of which can reach agreement on this important issue that whether to conduct court substantive examination or not under the premise of party autonomy. So sports arbitration judicial supervision pattern should not supervise the sports arbitration entity based on the court principle, but allow parties to agree to expand the right of supervision, and it is the ideal model which is suitable to China＇s judicial system.

关 键 词：体育仲裁 司法监督 监督模式 

分 类 号：G80[文化科学—运动人体科学]