本文選題：海峽兩岸 + 仲裁裁決�。� 參考：《華僑大學(xué)》2012年碩士論文

【摘要】：2010年6月，海峽兩岸關(guān)系協(xié)會(huì)（以下簡(jiǎn)稱(chēng)海協(xié)會(huì)）和財(cái)團(tuán)法人海峽交流基金會(huì)（以下簡(jiǎn)稱(chēng)海基會(huì)）領(lǐng)導(dǎo)人第五次會(huì)議中簽署了《海峽兩岸經(jīng)濟(jì)合作框架協(xié)議》，該協(xié)議于2010年9月正式生效。兩岸經(jīng)貿(mào)交流開(kāi)啟了新的時(shí)代，隨著經(jīng)貿(mào)關(guān)系的深入發(fā)展，經(jīng)貿(mào)糾紛勢(shì)必會(huì)增多。仲裁在解決經(jīng)貿(mào)糾紛中具有程序靈活，效率高，費(fèi)用低、保密、專(zhuān)業(yè)性強(qiáng)等優(yōu)勢(shì)，歷來(lái)備受兩岸商人的推崇。然仲裁解決糾紛要達(dá)到理想的效果，，須以完善的認(rèn)可與執(zhí)行機(jī)制的建立為依托。目前，兩岸是以各自法域單獨(dú)立法的模式規(guī)制對(duì)方仲裁裁決在本法域的認(rèn)可與執(zhí)行。盡管兩岸仲裁裁決相互認(rèn)可與執(zhí)行的基本構(gòu)建已建成，但這種單向立法模式本身存在的缺陷不可忽視，在實(shí)踐中也暴露出不少問(wèn)題。通過(guò)比較兩岸仲裁裁決相互認(rèn)可與執(zhí)行機(jī)制的四種模式，本文認(rèn)為在目前兩岸關(guān)系步入正�；A段，簽訂雙邊協(xié)議較為可行。但若在較長(zhǎng)時(shí)間內(nèi)無(wú)法簽訂雙邊協(xié)議的情況下，兩岸應(yīng)對(duì)各自法域就此問(wèn)題的規(guī)定進(jìn)行完善。本文主要采用了歷史研究方法、案例研究方法、比較分析方法。 本文主要分為以下三章： 第一章兩岸仲裁裁決相互認(rèn)可與執(zhí)行的歷史考察。通過(guò)對(duì)兩岸仲裁裁決相互認(rèn)可與執(zhí)行機(jī)制從萌芽到最終建立的歷史脈絡(luò)的分析，以展望兩岸仲裁裁決相互認(rèn)可與執(zhí)行機(jī)制的未來(lái)。 第二章兩岸仲裁裁決相互認(rèn)可與執(zhí)行制度的問(wèn)題。本章闡述了兩岸仲裁裁決相互認(rèn)可與執(zhí)行機(jī)制的現(xiàn)狀，并對(duì)其在實(shí)踐中出現(xiàn)的幾個(gè)重要問(wèn)題進(jìn)行剖析，并且著重對(duì)近年來(lái)在兩岸引起極大反響的浙江紡織案進(jìn)行了深入分析。 第三章兩岸仲裁裁決相互認(rèn)可與執(zhí)行制度的完善。本章總結(jié)前文，并比較了兩岸仲裁裁決相互認(rèn)可與執(zhí)行機(jī)制的四種模式，提出兩岸仲裁裁決相互認(rèn)可與執(zhí)行的完善建議。
[Abstract]:June 2010, The leaders of the Association for Relations across the Taiwan Strait (ARATS) and the Straits Exchange Foundation (SEF) signed the Framework Agreement on Cross-Strait Economic Cooperation, which came into effect in September 2010. Cross-strait economic and trade exchanges have opened a new era, with the in-depth development of economic and trade relations, economic and trade disputes are bound to increase. Arbitration has the advantages of flexible procedure, high efficiency, low cost, confidentiality and strong professionalism in resolving economic and trade disputes, and has always been highly respected by businessmen on both sides of the strait. However, to achieve the ideal effect, arbitration must rely on the establishment of perfect recognition and execution mechanism. At present, the two sides regulate the recognition and enforcement of the other party's arbitration award in their respective jurisdictions. Although the basic construction of mutual recognition and enforcement of arbitration awards between the two sides of the strait has been built, the defects of this one-way legislative model cannot be ignored and many problems are exposed in practice. By comparing the four modes of mutual recognition and enforcement mechanism of cross-strait arbitration awards, this paper holds that it is feasible to sign bilateral agreements in the stage of normalization of cross-strait relations. However, if bilateral agreements cannot be signed for a long time, the two sides should improve the provisions on this issue in their respective jurisdictions. This article mainly uses the historical research method, the case study method, the comparative analysis method. This paper is divided into the following three chapters: the first chapter is the historical investigation of mutual recognition and enforcement of cross-Strait arbitration awards. Based on the analysis of the historical context of the mutual recognition and enforcement mechanism of arbitration awards between the two sides of the strait from the bud to the final establishment, this paper looks forward to the future of the mutual recognition and enforcement mechanism of arbitration awards between the two sides of the strait. The second chapter is about the system of mutual recognition and enforcement of cross-strait arbitration awards. This chapter expounds the current situation of mutual recognition and enforcement mechanism of cross-strait arbitration awards, and analyzes several important issues in practice, and focuses on the in-depth analysis of Zhejiang textile cases which have aroused great repercussions in recent years. Chapter III: mutual recognition and enforcement of cross-strait arbitration awards. This chapter summarizes the above, and compares the four modes of mutual recognition and enforcement mechanism of cross-Strait arbitration awards, and puts forward some suggestions to improve the mutual recognition and enforcement of cross-Strait arbitration awards.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：華僑大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2012
【分類(lèi)號(hào)】：D997;D925.7

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前5條

1 黃暉;;論我國(guó)承認(rèn)和執(zhí)行區(qū)際仲裁裁決的模式選擇[J];河北法學(xué);2009年08期

2 宋連斌;;試論我國(guó)大陸與臺(tái)灣地區(qū)相互認(rèn)可和執(zhí)行仲裁裁決[J];時(shí)代法學(xué);2006年06期

3 喬慧娟;;論臺(tái)灣地區(qū)承認(rèn)和執(zhí)行大陸民商事判決中的既判力問(wèn)題[J];暨南學(xué)報(bào)(哲學(xué)社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2010年04期

4 于飛;;公共秩序保留的適度適用——以?xún)砂断嗷フJ(rèn)可與執(zhí)行法院判決和仲裁裁決為視角[J];臺(tái)灣研究集刊;2010年03期

5 宋錫祥;;海峽兩岸相互認(rèn)可和執(zhí)行仲裁裁決若干問(wèn)題探討[J];政治與法律;2008年12期

相關(guān)重要報(bào)紙文章 前1條

1 山東省高級(jí)人民法院 于喜富;[N];人民法院報(bào);2008年

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前1條

1 魏若晨;兩岸仲裁裁決之相互承認(rèn)與執(zhí)行[D];中國(guó)政法大學(xué);2011年

本文編號(hào)：2084992