A Study on the Cross-Strait Economic and Trade Arbitration

• Main Authors: WU, SUNG-MAO, 吳松茂
• Other Authors: 林誠二
• Format: Others
• Language: zh-TW
• Published: 2017
• Online Access: http://ndltd.ncl.edu.tw/handle/9z8eje

碩士 === 東吳大學 === 法律學系 === 105 === Arbitration is one of various methods that together are referred to as alternative dispute resolution or ADR. As suggested by the name, the idea behind methods of ADR is to provide an alternative to filing a lawsuit and going to court, which is the traditional method for resolving legal disputes. Arbitration and similar alternatives were primarily designed to provide for a streamlined and cost-conscious option to deal with a legal issue. Parties are encouraged to choose the law applicable to the substance of their dispute. They may choose a specific country's law or international rules or principles, such as the CISG (Convention of International Sale of Goods). If the parties do not choose the applicable law, the arbitral tribunal will choose the law it deems appropriate. Because of the political factors, the legislative system of China does not seen Taiwanese as foreigners. Therefore, it is not possible for Taiwanese to freely choose International arbitration institutions to arbitrate. Thus, Taiwanese businessmen have to seek to resolve their disputes through arbitration institutions of China or Hong Kong. Having a lot of trade with China, it is necessary to study the cross-strait economic and trade arbitration system in order to seek more efficient and appropriate dispute resolution for cross-strait economic and trade disputes. This paper aims to compare the cross-strait arbitration system, so that readers could understand the cross-strait economic and trade arbitration system, and have a more clear view when it comes to dispute resolution for cross-strait economic and trade disputes. This study first analyzes the evolution of arbitration and analyzes the advantages and disadvantages of economic and trade arbitration system. There are numerous advantages to arbitration as a way to resolve a case. The parties to the dispute usually agree on the arbitrator, so the arbitrator will be someone that both sides have confidence will be impartial and fair. The dispute will normally be resolved much sooner, as a date for the arbitration can usually be obtained a lot faster than a court date. Arbitration is usually a lot less expensive. Partly that is because the fee paid the arbitrator is a lot less than the expense of paying expert witnesses to come and testify at trial. There are also lower costs in preparing for the arbitration than there are in for preparing for a trial. Partly this is due to the fact that the rules of evidence are often more relaxed than in a trial. Unlike a trial, arbitration is essentially a private procedure, so that if the parties desire privacy then the dispute and the resolution can be kept confidential. If arbitration is binding, there are very limited opportunities for either side to appeal, so the arbitration will be the end of the dispute. That gives finality to the arbitration award that is not often present with a trial decision. The second part of this paper compares the differences between the arbitration systems across the strait. This paper explores the historical causes of the differences between arbitration systems of Taiwan and China, and compares the arbitration laws of both countries across the Taiwan strait, the economic and trade arbitration institutions, and arbitration procedures of both countries. Finally, it is expected that through this paper readers will have a comprehensive understanding of the practice of economic and trade arbitration of Taiwan and China then avoid unnecessary risks and losses when disputes occur. In other words, to enhance the competitiveness of Taiwanese businessmen in China.