Legal Thoughts onthe Trial Methods of Arbitral Tribunal fromthe Perspective of International Arbitration-Suggestions of RevisionTrends on the Article 3 9 , 40 of Chinese Arbitration Act  

作　　者：张建[1] 

机构地区：[1]中国政法大学国际法学院,北京100088

出　　处：《石家庄经济学院学报》2016年第3期108-112,共5页Journal of Shijiazhuang University of Economics

基　　金：北京仲裁委员会科研基金项目“国际商事仲裁证据规则的制定与适用问题研究”（201510）;中国政法大学研究生精品课程项目“国际私法著作精读#（YJPXC06）.

摘　　要：中国《仲裁法》颁布二十多年来,从时代演进的角度分析,现行仲裁程序的立法条款对仲裁庭仲裁权的行使已构成桎梏,亟待革新。现行《仲裁法》第3 9 条与第40 条分别是关于仲裁审理方式与仲裁不公开原则的规定,其对书面审理抑或开庭审理方式的设定未能凸显仲裁庭裁量权,而对仲裁保密性的限度未能确立保密义务人的范畴,显得僵化,无益于仲裁的灵活性与自治性优势的发挥.为提升我国仲裁的国际化,相关部门有必要重视仲裁法修订的问题.Chinese Arbitration Act has promulgated more than twenty years,when taking the historical development into consideration,our arbitration legislation have become barrier for the arbitral tribunal to make use of their power to arbitrate,so its revision is badly in need.Article 39 and 40 of our Arbitration Act are about the trial methods and heard in private session respectively,its setting did not make the arbitral tribunal's power stand up,and the extent of privacy in arbitration did not resolve the problems of the subject,which made the article quite inflexible,becoming the obstacles to arbitration's advantages.To improve the internationality of Chinese arbitration,the relevant authority should attach importance to the revision of Arbitration Act.

关 键 词：不公开审理 书面审理 当事人意思自治 仲裁权 

分 类 号：D997.4[政治法律—国际法学]