论仲裁司法审查中公共政策的平衡——从最高人民法院指导性案例199号切入  

The Balance of Public Policy in Arbitration Judicial Review:From the Perspective of the Guiding Case No.199 Decided by the Supreme People's Court of the People's Republic of China

作　　者：冯硕 Feng Shuo

机构地区：[1]上海政法学院国际法学院 [2]中国政法大学博士后流动站

出　　处：《国际法研究》2024年第3期146-160,共15页Chinese Review of International Law

基　　金：教育部人文社会科学研究青年基金项目“国际商事仲裁数字化及中国应对研究”(项目批准号:23YJC820010)资助。

摘　　要：最高人民法院指导性案例199号以公共政策为由撤销涉及比特币交易的仲裁裁决,再度引发业界对仲裁司法审查中公共政策条款适用的关注。仲裁司法审查对公共政策条款的适用应平衡公共利益与私人利益、国内利益与国际利益以及现时利益与未来利益,以期在支持仲裁的过程中维护国家法秩序的统一。近年来公共政策也因公私利益的交融、跨域竞争和技术迭代呈现出新的演进趋势,仲裁司法审查中公共政策的平衡也相应受此影响。面对该趋势,中国法院既应以利益衡量的方法坚守司法公共政策与国家宏观政策的协同性,维护法秩序统一和稳定;也应以仲裁友好立场指引公共政策条款的适用,尊重当事人意思自治并弱化公权力对仲裁的干预。此外,中国应借助分轨制司法审查模式,区分情形地进行公共政策审查。在涉外及国际仲裁裁决的司法审查中,中国法院仍应以程序性审查为主、实质性审查为辅。在国内仲裁裁决的司法审查中,中国法院可暂时保留实质性审查和程序性审查相结合的标准,并逐步向涉外及国际仲裁裁决的司法审查模式靠拢,以期推动仲裁司法审查裁量基准的统一,并助力中国仲裁的国际化。The Guiding Case No.199 decided by the Supreme People's Court of the People's Republic of China(hereinafter referred to as the Supreme People's Court),which revoked an arbitration award involving digital currency transactions on the grounds of public policy,has once again raised concerns about the application of public policy provisions in arbitration judicial review.The application of public policy provisions in arbitration judicial review should be balanced around public and private interests,domestic and international interests,as well as current and future interests,in order to maintain the unity of national legal order in supporting the arbitration process.In recent years,public policies have also shown new evolutionary trends due to the integration of public and private interests,cross regional competition,and technological iteration,which have had an impact on the balance of public policies in arbitration judicial review.Faced with these trends,Chinese courts should adhere to the synergy between judicial public policies and national macro policies through the method of measuring interests,and maintain the unity and stability of legal order.We should also guide the application of public policies with a friendly stance towards arbitration,respect party autonomy,and weaken the intervention of public power in arbitration.We should use the segmented judicial review model to distinguish the application of public policies,advocate procedural review as the main approach and substantive review as a supplement in judicial review of foreign-related and international arbitration,temporarily retain the combination of substantive review and procedural review in judicial review of domestic arbitration,and gradually move closer to the judicial review model of foreign-related and international arbitration,in order to promote the unity of arbitration judicial review discretion standards and assist in the internationalization of Chinese arbitration.

关 键 词：公共政策 国际仲裁 指导案例 比特币 纽约公约 仲裁法 数字货币 

分 类 号：D925.7[政治法律—诉讼法学] D926.21[政治法律—法学]