摘要
仲裁地通常由当事人在仲裁协议中约定,《鹿特丹规则》则规定对承运人提起索赔的一方可在仲裁协议约定地点以外的特定地点提起仲裁,"法定"仲裁地规定由此产生。从《鹿特丹规则》规定"法定仲裁地"的目的出发,对《鹿特丹规则》"法定仲裁地"规定加以详细剖析,指出其在实施过程中可能遭遇的障碍。鉴于"法定仲裁地"规定系《鹿特丹规则》的选择适用内容,中国没有必要立即将其引入国内法,而应当在仲裁法中构建仲裁地制度和临时仲裁制度,为其将来在中国的实施作准备。
The place of arbitration is usually stipulated in the arbitration agreement by arties. However, the person asserting a claim against the carrier may choose the seat of arbitration from the specific places under the Rotterdam Rules, which results in the statutory place of arbitration. This paper, by introducing the purpose of the rule of the statutory place of arbitration, analyzes the rule itself and the probable obstacles in the process of implementation in details. China need not established it in national law immediately for its opt-in nature, but the system of the seat of arbitration and ad hoe arbitration should be estab-lished in arbitration law at an early date to prepare for the domestic implementation in the future.
出处
《中国海商法研究》
CSSCI
2014年第1期57-62,87,共7页
Chinese Journal of Maritime Law
关键词
《鹿特丹规则》
仲裁协议
仲裁地
选择适用
临时仲裁
Rotterdam Rules
arbitration agreement
place of arbitration
opt-in
ad hoc arbitration
