论文部分内容阅读
1958年6月10日签订的《承认与执行外国仲裁裁决纽约公约》(以下简称《纽约公约》)使仲裁裁决在全球范围内的自由流动得到了保障。然而,即便仲裁以当事人的意思自由为本,各国对仲裁的种种限制依然存在。《纽约公约》第5条列举了执行法院基于一方当事人的请求或者基于法院本身的动议拒绝承认与执行外国仲裁裁决的一系列情形。本文以《纽约公约》的该条规定为线索,旨在分析法国与比利时对可仲裁性、正当程序以及公共政策等外国仲裁裁决承认与执行的限制性因素的处理方式。
The New York Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards (“the New York Convention”) signed on June 10, 1958, ensured the free flow of arbitral awards on a global scale. However, even if arbitration is based on the freedom of the parties, various restrictions on arbitration still exist in various countries. Article 5 of the New York Convention enumerates a number of cases in which the enforcement of a court’s refusal or failure to recognize and enforce a foreign arbitral award is based on the request of one of the parties or on the basis of the court’s own motion. This article cites this provision of the New York Convention as a clue to analyze how France and Belgium deal with the restrictive factors that govern the recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitral awards such as arbitrability, due process and public policy.