司法仲裁程序的构成与有效性研究  

Current Overview of Judicial Arbitration System in the United States

作　　者：申琛 Shen Chen

机构地区：[1]中国社会科学院大学法学院,北京102488

出　　处：《南海法学》2021年第5期11-24,共14页The South China Sea Law Journal

摘　　要：目前,我国多元化纠纷解决机制构建仍然集中在以人民调解为主导的调解领域,无法满足转型期社会纠纷解决需求。司法仲裁制度综合了裁判和仲裁的第三者居中裁判,以及调解的非约束性特征,能够适应复杂民事纠纷的解决需求。该制度起源且仅存在于美国民事司法制度之中,受不同法院的司法环境背景以及社会环境的影响,其实践形态和制度有效性评价均不相同。从各州和联邦法院的施行情况来看,项目的参与路径、适用条件、仲裁员自治要求、重新审判门槛等均存在差异,不同地方的司法仲裁项目的有效性评价也各不相同。虽然,对美国司法仲裁制度的评价褒贬不一,争议颇多,但是司法仲裁的有效性可能取决于仲裁方案的结构或更大的法院案件管理背景及其运作的法律实践文化,因此其可移植性并不能被完全否定。At present,the construction of China′s pluralistic dispute resolution mechanism is still focused on the field of mediation led by people′s mediation,which cannot meet the needs of dispute resolution in the society in transition.The judicial arbitration system combines the third-party adjudication of adjudication and arbitration,and the non-binding nature of mediation,and is able to meet the needs of complex civil disputes.The system originated and exists only in the US civil justice system,and its practice and effectiveness have been evaluated differently depending on the context of the courts and the social environment.The implementation of the system in state and federal courts varies in terms of pathways to participation,conditions of application,requirements for arbitrator autonomy,and thresholds for retrial,and the effectiveness of judicial arbitration programmes varies from place to place.Although,the US judicial arbitration system has received mixed and controversial reviews,the effectiveness of judicial arbitration may depend on the structure of the arbitration program or the larger court case management context and the culture of legal practice in which it operates,and therefore its portability cannot be completely dismissed.

关 键 词：司法ADR 美国民事诉讼制度 司法仲裁 多元化纠纷解决 

分 类 号：D915.7[政治法律—诉讼法学]