Bibliographie sélective OHADA

后疫情时代，以虚拟听证为代表的虚拟现实技术在国际商事仲裁领域的广泛引用，对原本以当事人意思自治主义为核心的国际商事仲裁传统制度造成了冲击，形成了仲裁机构权力相对扩大的现象。一方面，其体现为在当事人的意思自治与仲裁庭权力发生分歧，并诉诸法院解决纠纷之时，法院在事实上驳回了当事人的诉请、支持了仲裁庭的诉求；另一方面，则体现为虚拟听证作为国际商事仲裁领域提高仲裁效率的关键切入点，在一定程度上和当事人追求的公平之间出现碰撞。因此，为了缓解仲裁当事人和仲裁机构的矛盾、平衡公平和效率的冲突，应当从实质上规范仲裁机构的行为、从形式上增加仲裁机构的公信力，在制度层面和技术层面对仲裁庭权力进行有效制约。 In the post-epidemic era, the extensive use of virtual reality technology in the field of international commercial arbitration, represented by virtual hearings, has impacted the traditional system of international commercial arbitration centered on party autonomy, resulting in the relative expansion of the power of arbitral institutions. On the one hand, it is reflected in the party’s autonomy and arbitral tribunal power disagreement, and resort to the court to resolve disputes, the court in fact rejected the party’s claim, support the arbitral tribunal’s claim; on the other hand, it is reflected in the virtual hearing as the international commercial arbitration field to improve the efficiency of arbitration key entry point, to a certain extent, and the parties to the pursuit of fairness of the collision between. Therefore, in order to alleviate the contradiction between the parties to arbitration and the arbitration institution, and to balance the conflict between fairness and efficiency, it is necessary to regulate the behavior of the arbitration institution in terms of substance, to increase the credibility of the arbitration institution in terms of form, and to impose effective constraints on the power of the arbitration tribunal at the institutional level and at the technical level.

第三方资助是国际仲裁领域较为新兴的制度，其由于可以有效帮助当事人解决仲裁高昂费用，承担仲裁败诉风险等优点，受到国际商事主体和仲裁机构的青睐和认可。第三方资助给当事人带来利益的同时，也会给仲裁程序造成可能的负面影响。如何让第三方资助更好地服务国际仲裁，与国际仲裁和谐发展，采取何种措施规制第三方资助的发展，是研究第三方资助需要重点关注的问题。本文在分析第三方资助对国际仲裁程序带来的积极价值和可能存在的风险的基础上，研究现有包含第三方资助规则的仲裁规则，比较各个仲裁机构对披露规则的不同规定。提出在《仲裁法》中确立国际仲裁第三方资助的合法性，并作出原则性规定，通过仲裁机构制定规则指引，以期为我国国际仲裁机构更好发展第三方资助制度建立法律基础。 Third-party funding is a relatively new system in the field of international arbitration, which is favored and recognized by international commercial subjects and arbitration institutions because it can effectively help the parties to solve the high cost of arbitration and bear the risk of losing the arbitration. While the third-party funding brings benefits to the parties, it also brings possible negative effects to the arbitration process. How to make third-party funding better serve international arbitration, develop harmoniously with international arbitration, and what measures to take to regulate the development of third-party funding are the issues that need to be focused on in the study of third-party funding. Based on the analysis of the positive value and possible risks brought by third-party funding to international arbitration proceedings, this paper studies the existing arbitration rules containing third-party funding rules and compares the different provisions of disclosure rules of various arbitration institutions. It is proposed to establish the legality of third-party funding for international arbitration in the Arbitration Law, and make provisions in principle, and formulate rules and guidelines through arbitration institutions, so as to establish a legal basis for the better development of third-party funding system for international arbitration institutions in China.

随着民商事交往活动的发展，固守仲裁协议相对性已然无法应对现实需求，在一些特殊情况下仲裁协议的效力被认定应当扩展到非签署方。我国《民法典》对债权人代位权制度仅规定了诉讼的行权方式，在遇到次债务人基于有效仲裁协议提出的抗辩时，各地法院体现出了截然相反的裁判立场。仲裁协议效力在债权人代位权制度中的扩张将实现对债权人债权的保障以及次债务人程序权利的维护的双重效果。笔者认为，仲裁协议效力在债权人代位权制度中的扩张也能够得到债权人代位权制度和仲裁之性质的内在支撑。在此基础上，笔者提出了仲裁协议效力扩张在债权人代位权制度中进行扩张的具体方式。 With the development of civil and commercial interactions, the relativity of the arbitration agreement is no longer able to cope with the needs of reality, and the validity of the arbitration agreement has been recognized to be extended to non-signatory parties under some special circumstances. The “Civil Code” of China provides for the subrogation system of creditors only in the form of litigation, and the courts in different places have reflected the opposite position of adjudication when faced with the defenses raised by sub-debtors based on a valid arbitration agreement. The expansion of the effect of arbitration agreement in the creditor subrogation system has the dual effect of safeguarding the creditor’s claim and preserving the procedural rights of the sub-debtor. The author believes that the expansion of the effect of arbitration agreement in the subrogation system of creditors can also be supported by the subrogation system of creditors and the nature of arbitration. On this basis, the author proposes a specific way for the expansion of arbitration agreement effect in the creditor subrogation system.

国际商事仲裁协议作为国际商事仲裁活动的开端，其效力直接关系到整个仲裁程序能否顺利进行，关系到仲裁裁决是否能被承认与执行以及纠纷能否得到顺利解决。司法实践中，法院通常从对仲裁协议效力要件审查入手，审查内容包括协议的书面性、仲裁事项、仲裁机构和当事人的意思表示等要件。除此之外，仲裁协议的准据法也是法院在审查过程中关注的对象。当前实践中仍存在一些问题亟待解决，在促进仲裁工作不断发展的前提下，通过尊重当事人意思自治、弱化仲裁机构选定的强制性规定、完善“使其有效”原则，来争取使更多的仲裁协议能够得到认可。 As the beginning of international commercial arbitration, the effectiveness of the international commercial arbitration agreement is directly related to whether the whole arbitration procedure can proceed smoothly, whether the arbitration award can be recognized and enforced, and whether the dispute can be successfully resolved. In judicial practice, the court usually starts with the examination of the validity elements of the arbitration agreement, including the written nature of the agreement, the arbitration matters, the expression of the intention of the arbitration institution and the parties. In addition, the applicable law of the arbitration agreement is also the object of attention of the court in the process of review. At present, there are still some problems to be solved in practice. On the premise of promoting the continuous development of arbitration work, we should respect the autonomy of the parties’ will, weaken the mandatory provisions on the selection of arbitration institutions, and improve the principle of “making it effective”, so that more arbitration agreements can be recognized.

国际投资仲裁发轫于国际商事仲裁，但二者之间存在不小的差异，因此对国际投资仲裁裁决的司法审查应区别于对商事仲裁裁决的司法审查。国际投资仲裁裁决的司法审查宜遵循全面审查原则，法院在对条约进行解释时宜力求探索双方当事人缔约时原意。当前我国国内城市被选为仲裁地竞争力不足，国内仲裁机构和仲裁员缺乏参与国际投资仲裁实践经验，在签订部分对外投资协定时，未明确规定透明度条款，立法上我国对临时仲裁的态度不明，亦未明确规定仲裁裁决国籍判断标准等，上述问题导致我国国内法院无权或无法有效对国际投资仲裁裁决进行司法审查，不利于提升我国在国际投资仲裁领域的话语权，就此本文提出一些可能的解决方案，以期完善我国对投资仲裁裁决的司法审查制度，提升我国在国际投资仲裁领域的地位。 International investment arbitration originated from international commercial arbitration, but there are significant differences between the two. Therefore, judicial review of international investment arbitration awards should be distinguished from that of commercial arbitration awards. Judicial review of international investment arbitration awards should adhere to the principle of comprehensive review, and courts should strive to uncover the original intent of the contracting parties when interpreting treaties. Currently, cities in China lack competitiveness as venues for arbitration. Domestic arbitration institutions and arbitrators have limited experience in international investment arbitration practice. Some foreign investment agreements signed by China do not explicitly stipulate transparency clauses. Additionally, China’s legislative stance on ad hoc arbitration is unclear, and the criteria for determining the nationality of arbitration awards are not explicitly defined. These issues result in domestic courts either lacking jurisdiction or being unable to effectively conduct judicial review of international investment arbitration awards, which undermines China’s discourse power in the field of international investment arbitration. This paper proposes several possible solutions to address these challenges, aiming to improve China’s judicial review system for investment arbitration on awards and enhance the country’s standing in the field of international investment arbitration.

由于商事交易具有复杂性，导致仲裁裁决可能对案外人实体权利造成侵犯。现行《仲裁法》、《民事诉 讼法》并未对案外人提供充足的程序性救济。理论上学者提出了不同的路径。本文认为案外人通过另行 起诉的途径救济与司法实务形成抵牾。同时对案外人的保护不应在仲裁程序中予以解决，即在仲裁制度 中第三人以及第三人撤销仲裁制度不应存在。我国可借鉴仲裁案外人异议之诉制度，在仲裁执行依据产 生后，案外人获知其权益受损后就可以提起异议之诉以阻断执行的开启或阻止当事人自觉履行；即使执 行程序终结，仲裁当事人取得执行标的并无实体法依据，案外人仍可提起异议之诉，使其回复到不受侵 害的圆满状态。此时案外人异议之诉本质上并不是撤销部分或全部仲裁裁决，而是剥夺该部分仲裁裁决 的执行力以维护自身权益。 Due to the complexity of commercial transactions, arbitral awards may infringe on the substantive rights of outsiders. The current Arbitration Law and Civil Procedure Law do not provide sufficient procedural relief for outsiders. Theoretically, scholars have proposed different paths. This article argues that the relief of outsiders through separate litigation is in conflict with judicial practice. At the same time, the protection of outsiders should not be resolved in the arbitration procedure, that is, in the arbitration system, there should be no third party and the third party revocation ar bitration system. China can learn from the system of objection litigation by outsiders in arbitra tion cases, after the basis for arbitration enforcement is generated, after the outsider learns that his rights and interests have been damaged, he can file an objection lawsuit to block the com mencement of enforcement or prevent the parties from consciously performing; Even if the en forcement procedure is concluded and there is no substantive legal basis for the parties to the ar bitration to obtain the subject matter of enforcement, the outsider may still file an opposition lawsuit to restore the party to a satisfactory state of infringement. In this case, the objection law suit of an outsider is not essentially to revoke part or all arbitral awards, but to deprive the enforcement of that part of the arbitral award in order to protect its own rights and interests.

国际商事仲裁作为国际商事纠纷的解决机制，一直坚持“一裁终局”原则，因其高效解决纠纷的优势而受到国际商事当事人大量适用。“一裁终局”原则因仲裁裁决具有终局性从而能相对快速的解决彼此之间的纠纷，但在现存的裁决审查程序制度下，其“一裁终局”的模式也使得当事人无进一步就裁决中的实体错误进行纠正的可能。因此，为了更好地适应现今的国际商事环境，本文欲探讨在保障仲裁高效解决纠纷的优势的前提下，通过仲裁制度的设计，在国际商事仲裁中建立复裁机制，进一步提高国际商事仲裁裁决的公正性。 International commercial arbitration has always been a dispute resolution mechanism based on the principle of “final and binding” to efficiently resolve disputes, which has been widely used by international commercial parties. The “final and binding” principle can relatively quickly resolve disputes between parties because the arbitral award is final. However, under the existing system of arbitral award review procedures, the “final and binding” principle also means that parties have no further possibility to correct substantive errors in the award. Therefore, in order to better adapt to today’s international commercial environment, this article intends to discuss the establishment of a review mechanism in international commercial arbitration through the design of the arbitration system on the premise of ensuring the advantages of efficient dispute resolution by arbitration, so as to further improve the impartiality of international commercial arbitration awards.

仲裁协议是仲裁的起点与基石，但在我国的仲裁实践中仲裁协议内容不规范，出现各类瑕疵的情况比比皆是。我国的仲裁法对于瑕疵仲裁协议并没有规定针对性的解释原则或系统性的方法，只规定了当事人可以就纠纷达成补充协议，若无法达成补充协议，则该瑕疵仲裁协议无效。因此相较于国际上诸多尽可能将仲裁协议效力尽可能作有效认定的国家与国际组织而言，我国法院在裁定瑕疵仲裁协议的效力时往往会过于严苛，将协议效力裁定无效。本文目的在于借鉴外国法对于瑕疵仲裁协议效力的认定标准以及解释原则，为我国法院实践中针对瑕疵仲裁协议效力的处理提出行之有效的认定与解释原则。 The arbitration agreement is the starting point and cornerstone of arbitra-tion, but in China's arbitration practice, the content of the arbitration agreement is not standard-ized, and various defects are common. China’s arbitration law does not stipulate the principle of targeted interpretation or systematic method for defective arbitration agreements, but only stipu-lates that the parties may reach a supplementary agreement on the dispute, and if a supplementary agreement cannot be reached, the defective arbitration agreement is invalid. Therefore, compared with many international countries and international organizations that try to make as effective a determination as possible about the validity of an arbitration agreement, Chinese courts tend to be too strict in ruling on the validity of a defective arbitration agreement and rule that the validity of the agreement is invalid. The purpose of this paper is to refer to the determination standards and interpretation principles of foreign laws on the validity of defective arbitration agreements, and to propose effective principles for the determination and interpretation of the validity of defective ar-bitration agreements in the practice of Chinese courts.

国际商事仲裁协议的有效性关系到仲裁协议的仲裁准据法确定、裁决执行、仲裁机关选择等问题，因而在国际商事仲裁实践中具有重要意义。影响仲裁协议效力的原因一般为仲裁条款约定不明，约定机构不准确，协议内部矛盾等原因。对于国际贸易中，仲裁协议的效力可以参考国际通行的效力确定准则，尽可能撮合交易，确立有效性。可以通过利于有效性、准据法分裂和突破书面形式等辅助手段确定有效性，借以实现国际仲裁协议的有效性最大化。 The validity of an international commercial arbitration agreement is related to issues such as the determination of the applicable law of the arbitration agreement, the enforcement of the award, and the selection of the arbitration institution, so it is of great significance in the practice of international commercial arbitration. Reasons that affect the validity of an arbitration agreement are generally unclear stipulations in the arbitration clause, inaccurate agreement institutions, and internal contradictions in the agreement. For international trade, the validity of an arbitration agreement can refer to the internationally accepted criteria for determining the validity of an arbitration agreement to match transactions as much as possible and establish validity. Validity can be determined through auxiliary means such as favoring validity, splitting applicable law, and breaking through written forms, so as to maximize the validity of international arbitration agreements.

国际投资仲裁实践中，仲裁庭随意解释、扩大解释、解释不一致或背离缔约国真实意图的情形极为常见。《维也纳条约法公约》第31条至33条作为习惯国际法条约解释的黄金法则，对仲裁庭条约解释权的引导至关重要。利用法律解释理论，对《维也纳条约法公约》第31条的重构，利用该公约引导与规范仲裁庭的条约解释权，强化文本解释的框架作用，将文本解释与目的解释相结合，正确理解嗣后解释与系统解释的辅助作用，引入演化解释法，以推动仲裁庭正确理解投资条约条款，作出准确、有效、合理的解释。 In the practice of international investment arbitration, it is extremely common for arbitral tribunals to arbitrarily interpret, expand interpretation, interpret inconsist-ently or deviate from the true intent of the contracting parties. Articles 31 to 33 of the Vienna Con-vention on the Law of Treaties (VCLT), as the golden rule of treaty interpretation in customary state law, are crucial in guiding the power of treaty interpretation of arbitral tribunals, using the theory of legal interpretation, the reconstruction of Article 31 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Trea-ties, the use of the Convention to guide and rule the treaty interpretation power of the arbitral tri-bunal, strengthen the framework role of textual interpretation, combine textual interpretation with purposive interpretation, correctly understand the auxiliary role of subsequent interpretation and systematic interpretation, and introduce the evolutionary interpretation method in order to pro-mote the arbitral tribunal to correctly understand the provisions of investment treaties and make accurate, effective and reasonable interpretation.

仲裁保密性在传统上被默认为仲裁的一部分，是民商事仲裁的显著特征和重要优势，也是民商事主体选择仲裁的重要原因。但随着社会的发展，仲裁保密观念开始发生转变，提高仲裁透明度的呼声越来越高，仲裁保密性呈现明显弱化趋势。即便如此，基于仲裁保密制度自身的价值、公开先例的缺乏以及保密性作为仲裁的重要特征，仲裁保密性仍有存在的必要性，不能轻易废除。面对新的发展形势，仲裁保密性相关研究应与时俱进，不断创新，为仲裁活动的开展创造良好的保密环境。基于此，为更好地维护仲裁保密性，应明示仲裁保密义务、采用“原则 + 例外”立法模式，并重视仲裁规则对保密性的确认。 The confidentiality of arbitration is traditionally regarded as a part of arbitration by default, which is an important characteristic and advantage of civil and commercial arbitration, and also an important reason for civil and commercial subjects to choose arbitration. However, with the development of society, the concept of arbitration confidentiality began to change, the call to im-prove the transparency of arbitration is growing higher and higher, the confidentiality of arbitration shows a clear trend of weakening. Even so, due to the value of the arbitration confidentiality system, the lack of public precedent and confidentiality as an important feature of arbitration, the confidentiality of arbitration is still necessary and can not be easily abolished. Facing the new development situation, the research on arbitration confidentiality should keep pace with the times, keep innovating and create a good environment for the development of arbitration. Therefore, in order to protect the confidentiality of arbitration, we should clearly state the obligation of arbitration confidentiality, adopt the legislative mode of “principle + exception”, and attach importance to the confirmation of the confidentiality of arbitration rules.

法庭之友源于英美法系的国内诉讼制度，其在国际投资仲裁中的诞生并非制度的精心设计，而是实践先行，是国际投资仲裁对于透明度和民主性批评的回应。因此，法庭之友制度被赋予了提高国际投资仲裁透明度和加强民主参与，甚至是全球治理的价值期待。通过分析不同仲裁庭的实践，法庭之友制度的真正价值，仍然在于辅助仲裁庭解决投资争端，相关规则构建也应围绕这一根本目的展开。国际投资仲裁也应回归其宗旨，通过解决投资争端，同时对舆论有所回应，从而获得公众对其合法性的认同。 Amicus curiae originated from the domestic litigation system of the common law system. The birth of amicus curiae in international investment arbitration was not an elaborate design of the system, but a practice first, a response to criticism of transparency and democracy in international investment arbitration. Thus, the amicus curiae system has been given the value ex-pectation of enhancing transparency and strengthening democratic participation in international investment arbitration, and even global governance. By analyzing the practices of different arbitral tribunals, the real value of the amicus curiae system still lies in assisting arbitral tribunals to re-solve investment disputes, and the relevant rules should be constructed around this fundamental purpose. International investment arbitration should also return to its purpose of gaining public recognition of its legitimacy by resolving investment disputes and responding to public opinion at the same time.

投资者滥诉是一种复杂的法律现象，国际投资仲裁实践中仲裁庭法律解释权规制的缺失，东道国救济地位的弱化，第三方资助的推波助澜等因素是滥诉风险的重要诱因。双边投资条约的概括性、不确定性导致争端双方仲裁合意的缺失，投资者可以随时主动提起仲裁，而东道国只能被动应诉，投资仲裁的主动权始终掌握在投资者的手里。滥诉风险的防范是一项系统工程。对仲裁庭的法律解释权进行必要的规制是完善ICSID仲裁机制的首要任务，建立对投资者的仲裁请求的先行审查制度有利于滤去明显缺乏法律依据的诉求，增强国际投资仲裁的透明度是督促投资者谨慎提起仲裁的重中之重，对规制滥诉具有重要的积极意义。 Investors abuse is a complex legal phenomenon. The lack of legal interpretation power of arbitration tribunals in the international investment arbitration practice, the weakening of the relief status of the host country, and the influencing factors of third-party funding are important incentives for the abuse of risk. The generality and uncertainty of the bilateral investment treaty lead to the lack of agreement between the parties to the dispute. The investor can initiate arbitration at any time. The host country can only respond passively. The initiative to invest in arbitration is always in the hands of investors. The prevention of abuse of risk is a systematic project. The necessary regulation of the arbitral tribunal’s legal interpretation pow-er is the primary task of perfecting the ICSID arbitration mechanism. Establishing a pre-examination system for investors’ arbitration requests is conducive to filtering out claims that are obviously lacking in legal basis, and enhancing the transparency of international investment arbitration is of great positive significance to the regulation of abuses.

本文以《纽约公约》第五条第二款(乙)项为起点，结合国际实践与理论中的发展趋势，分析公共政策在国际商事仲裁司法审查中的运用。其中在发展过程中呼声最高的两种观点，一是质疑“公共政策”在实践层面的现实意义；二是主张以“国际公共政策”替代“区域性公共政策”。在本文中，笔者将逐一驳斥这两种观点，并且主张地域性公共政策应当长期存续，并且其与国际公共政策的差异性具有正当性，不应当一味、盲目地主张两者趋同。 Starting with Article V(2)(b) of the New York Convention, this article analyzes the application of public policy in judicial review of international commercial arbitration in light of the developing trends in international practice and theory. The two most vocal views in the process of development are those that question the practical significance of “public policy” in practice and those that advocate replacing “regional public policy” with “international public policy”. The second is that “international public policy” should replace “regional public policy”. In this article, author will refute each of these two views and argue that regional public policy should survive in the long term and that its differences with international public policy are justified, and that there should not be a blind convergence between the two.

本文以国际商会(ICC)仲裁规则为例，结合某企业的国际仲裁实践，从仲裁的一般程序和仲裁费用两个角度，对申请人(Claimant)和被申请人(Respondent)在国际仲裁中的程序和费用进行了阐述，帮助读者对国际仲裁程序获得整体了解，为是否选择进入仲裁程序提供基本背景及考量基础。 Under taking the arbitration rules of the international chamber of commerce (ICC), combined with an international arbitration practice of a China enterprise as well as from the perspective of the general arbitration procedure and arbitration cost, to make a detailed summary from the point of claimant and respondent. It will help reader to have an overall understanding of the ICC arbitration procedure and cost and provide a basic background and consideration for whether to choose to enter the arbitration procedure.

异议权放弃规则既符合诚实信用原则，也尊重当事人的意思自治，契合国际商事仲裁对于效率价值的追求。正确运用异议权放弃规则，需要明确区分该规则的各种类型、细致分析其构成要件。我国现行仲裁法对于异议权放弃规则的规定范围较窄，虽然征求意见稿对此已有所突破，但仍可继续完善。 The waiver of objection right not only conforms to the principle of good faith, but also respects the autonomy of the parties’ will, which accords with the pursuit of efficiency value in international commercial arbitration. In order to use the rule correctly, it is necessary to clearly distinguish the types of the rule and carefully analyze its constituent elements. The current arbitration law of China has a narrow scope for the rule of giving up the right of objection. Although the draft for soliciting opinions has made a breakthrough, it can still be improved.

在国际仲裁中，临时措施和保全措施发挥着重要的作用。两者作为救济当事方的重要措施，其目的是保全证据、保护资产和维持待决裁决的现状。但在仲裁程序中以及执行仲裁裁决过程中，仲裁双方可能对指定仲裁员或者其他方面的事项存在大量分歧，争议不能快速解决，导致资产或证据很容易就会消失，如果获胜方没有在正确的时间获得必要的解决措施，他可能只会得到得不偿失的胜利。近年来，不同的仲裁机构旨在通过提供迅速和有效的准予紧急救济的机制，满足市场对商事仲裁的愿望，因此，国际上的主要仲裁机构适应时代发展创设了紧急仲裁员制度。然而，紧急仲裁员制度的有效性却成为一个争议话题。众多学者关注《纽约公约》下的紧急救济的可执行性以及紧急仲裁员和国内法院在授予临时措施的并行管辖权的风险。 Interim measures and preservation measures play an important role in international arbitration. Both serve as a measure of relief to the parties and are intended to preserve evidence, protect assets and maintain the status quo of pending awards. But in the arbitration procedure and execute in the process of the arbitration, the arbitration both parties may appoint arbitrators or other items; there are many differences in dispute cannot fast; result in assets or evidence is easy to disappear; if the winner didn’t at the right time to obtain the necessary measures, he may only get a pyrrhic victory. In recent years, different arbitration organizations aim to meet the market’s desire for commercial arbitration by providing a rapid and effective mechanism for granting emergency relief. Therefore, the main international arbitration organizations have established the emergency arbitrator system to adapt to the development of The Times. However, the effectiveness of the emergency arbitrator system has become a controversial topic. Many scholars have concerned themselves with the enforceability of emergency relief under the New York Convention and the risk of concurrent jurisdiction of emergency arbitrators and domestic courts in granting interim measures.

网络仲裁是运用科技手段将传统仲裁程序转移到网络进行的一种争端解决方式。不可否认网络仲裁凭借其无接触的特点解决了程序停滞和案件积压的问题，迎来了蓬勃的发展机遇，但网络仲裁庭审过程中也存在着程序不当风险、保密性问题和线上庭审秩序难以维护的法律挑战。然而，上述法律挑战并不能否认网络仲裁本身的合法性，也无法阻碍网络仲裁作为疫情时代争端解决的有效手段。为应对网络仲裁庭审过程中在理论和实践层面的法律挑战，应当从保障网络仲裁中当事人和律师的陈述权以维护程序正当、确立网络仲裁地、重视网络仲裁的保密性等方面稳步推进和完善网络仲裁制度。 Online arbitration is a kind of dispute settlement method, which uses technology to transfer the traditional arbitration procedure to the Internet. It is undeniable that online arbitration solves the problem of procedure stagnation and case backlog by virtue of its non-contact characteristic, ushered in the vigorous development opportunity. However, there are also some legal challenges in the process of online arbitration, such as risk of undue process, confidentiality, and difficulty in maintaining the order of online arbitration. But these legal challenges cannot deny the legitimacy of online arbitration itself, nor can they prevent it from being an effective means of dispute resolution in the era of COVID-19 pandemic. In order to cope with the legal challenges in the theoretical and practical aspects, the online arbitration system shall be steadily promoted and improved in terms of safeguarding the right for the parties and lawyers to fully present themselves in online arbitration so as to safeguard due process. Also, the rules of seat of online arbitration shall be determined and confidentiality of online arbitration should be paid attention to.

在国际商事仲裁制度的发展中，部分国际商事仲裁规则对指定仲裁员情形下的独任或首席仲裁员有中立 (第三)国籍要求。对于该问题在各个仲裁规则中的认识并不一致。从国家一侧出发分析国籍问题的法律 意义，则仲裁员国籍是其属人管辖的问题，我国适用于仲裁员的主管规则有修正的余地；从仲裁员一侧 看，认为其影响仲裁员的独立公正性理由不足，在很多场合，对其独立公正行使职权甚至是有益的；从 当事人和仲裁机构一侧出发，本国仲裁员有利于增加当事人信心，但仅应被视为仲裁员的一种中性条件。 仲裁机构试图利用中立国籍来保障仲裁裁决的顺利执行，其没有正当理由且效果存疑。正确处理该问题 的路径应当是认识到以实质国籍为代表的仲裁员属人联系，确保仲裁员的属人因素在选任过程中被当事 人考虑，摈弃中立国籍，并灵活利用属人因素在仲裁中的积极效用。 In the development of the international commercial arbitration, when appointing arbitrators, some of the arbitration rules have the requirement of neutral (third) nationality on the sole or presiding arbitrator’s nationality. The understanding of this issue is not consistent in various ar bitration rules. By analyzing the legal significance of the nationality from view of the nation, it is the matter of ratione personae of the arbitrator, the rules applicable to arbitrators in China can be further consistent with international standards. From the point of the arbitrator, there is not enough ground for the arbitrator’s nationality affecting his/her independency and impartiality; from the view of the parties and the arbitration institution, the domestic arbitrator is conducive to the increase of the confidence of the parties, but it should only be regarded as a condition of the arbitrator in a neutral way, and the arbitration institution tries to use neutral nationality to en sure the enforcement of the arbitral award being successfully, but there is no ground and its effect is doubtful. The correct way dealing with this issue is to recognize the personal connections of ar bitrators by symbol of substantive nationality, to ensure that the legal personal factors of arbitra tors are considered by the parties during the selection, renounce the rule of neutral nationality and to make flexible use of the positive effects of personal factors.

受新冠疫情的影响，远程开庭成为当下许多仲裁庭采取的庭审方式，多家仲裁机构也出台相关指引。尽管远程仲裁在一定程度上能提高案件的效率，缓解疫情带来的影响，但远程庭审也存在诸多争议，例如当事人意思自治与远程开庭之间的冲突、程序正当、保密性与安全性、仲裁地的确认等问题。通过梳理各仲裁机构的仲裁规则、相关指引、以及案例等材料，远程仲裁庭审的适用的确顺应时代需求，在未来具有可适用性，但仍需进一步完善其适用条件、优化远程庭审技术与设备。 By many arbitral tribunals, and several arbitration institutions have issued guidelines in this regard. Although remote hearing can, to a certain extent, improve the efficiency of cases and mitigate the impact of the epidemic, there are also many controversies surrounding remote hearings, such as the conflict between party autonomy and remote hearings, procedural due process, confidentiality, and security, and the confirmation of the place of arbitration. By reviewing the arbitration rules, guidelines, and cases of various arbitral institutions, it is clear that the application of remote hearings is in line with the needs of the times and maybe applicable in the future, but further improvement of the conditions for its application and optimization of remote hearing technology and equipment are still needed.