第三方资助国际仲裁中的仲裁费用分摊:理论检视、实践考察与中国因应  

作　　者：陈雅峥 

机构地区：[1]中国人民银行邵阳市分行

出　　处：《商事仲裁与调解》2024年第5期19-35,共17页Commercial Arbitration & Mediation

摘　　要：仲裁庭对仲裁费用的分摊享有广泛酌处权。第三方资助的出现使仲裁费用分摊裁决的不确定性进一步加重:当受资助方胜诉时,其能否以及能在何种范围内就第三方资助相关费用获得补偿?当申请人败诉时,出资人是否受到不利费用裁决的约束?法理层面上,基于仲裁协议的相对性,受资助方能就已由出资方代为支付的当事人费用(不包括商业回报费用)获得补偿;资助者并非当事人,原则上不应受到费用裁决的约束。无论是依据公平合理期待原则还是禁反言原则,仲裁合意均是仲裁协议效力扩张至出资人的前提。第三方资助费用分摊需考虑仲裁的效率与公正价值,并在两者冲突时以公正为先。实践层面上,已有部分仲裁规则将第三方资助纳入费用分摊的考虑因素。在典型案例中,仲裁庭对第三方资助费用的分摊存在不少分歧。长远来看,我国可以通过立法对第三方资助的合法性予以明确,并在仲裁规则中完善第三方资助费用分摊制度。同时,应当加强费用分摊制度与信息披露制度的衔接。The arbitral tribunal has broad discretion in allocating arbitration costs.The emergence of third-party funding(TPF)has further complicated the uncertainty of cost awards:can the successful funded party be entitled to TPF-related costs and to what extent?Can the funder be bound by an adverse cost award when the funded party loses?Legally,based on the privity of arbitration agreement,the successful party can be compensated for the party costs paid by the funder,but not for the commercial returns.Not being a party,the funder in principle should not be bound by the cost award.No matter applying the principle of fair and reasonable expectations or estoppel,the consent of arbitration is always the premise of expansion of the effectiveness of the arbitration agreement to the funder.In addition,the allocation of TPF costs needs to reflect the values of efficiency and justice and prioritize justice when conflict arises.In practice,some arbitration rules have already included TPF as a factor to be considered in cost allocation.In several typical cases,the tribunals still have different views on the allocation of TPF costs.In the long run,it is advisable for China to clarify the legality of TPF through legislation and improve the TPF cost allocation system through arbitration rules.At the same time,efforts should be made to link the cost allocation system with the information disclosure system.

关 键 词：第三方资助 国际仲裁 费用分摊 仲裁协议效力扩张 仲裁价值 

分 类 号：D997.4[政治法律—国际法学]