摘要
我国合同法第402、403条分别规定了隐名代理、与英美法系不公开本人身份的代理相类似的代理形式,在这两种代理中,代理人以自己的名义订立合同,本人与第三人之间并不存在直接的仲裁合意,那么仲裁条款能否约束本人与第三人呢?我国仲裁法及相关司法解释并没有做出规定。从理论上分析,在第402条的情况下,仲裁条款可以直接约束本人与第三人。而在第403条的情况下,则需要进行具体分析,不能直接适用合同法的法条规定。
The Articles 402 and 403 of the Contract Law of China have provisions on anonymous agency, a form similar to the undisclosed agency in common law system. In both of the agency forms, an agent signs a contract in his/her own name without direct consensus on arbitration between the principal and the third party. The Arbitration Law of China and relevant judicial interpretations make no regulations on whether the arbitration clauses have binding force on the principal and the third party. Through theoretical analyses, it＇ s suggested that the arbitration clause have direct binding force on the principal and the third party under the circumstances of Article 402, while the circumstances of Article 403 should be analyzed concretely and the regulations of the Contract Law are not directly applicable.
出处
《贵州警官职业学院学报》
2014年第4期69-74,共6页
Journal of Guizhou Police Officer Vocational College
关键词
仲裁条款
代理
隐名代理
效力
arbitration clause
agency
anonymous agency
validity
