Bibliographie sélective OHADA

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.