论文部分内容阅读
《华盛顿公约》第53条第1款并非“‘中心’仲裁撤销不是上诉”说的法律根据;在是否审查实体问题上,“中心”仲裁撤销与上诉之间并无本质的不同;“中心”仲裁撤销制度价值定位之争的众参与者之观点虽纷繁复杂,然皆未击中要害。将“中心”仲裁撤销制度的价值目标定位为维护“重大公正”而非目前学者们所鼓吹的“最低限度公正”确实极为必要。如此定位并不会降低“中心”仲裁撤销制度的吸引力,在技术上亦为可行。
Article 53, paragraph 1, of the Washington Convention is not the legal basis for the claim that “the arbitration of the center” is not an appeal. “There is no essential difference between” arbitration “and” withdrawal “of an arbitration on the issue of whether to examine an entity ; ”Center “ arbitration revocation system, the value of the positioning of the public opinion of the participants are numerous and complicated, but have not hit the key. It is really imperative to define the value objective of the ”“ center ’s arbitration and revocation system as maintaining ”significant justice “ rather than ”least fairness “ advocated by scholars at present. Such positioning will not reduce the attractiveness of the ”center" arbitration system and is technically feasible.