استانداردسازی منعطف اداره دلائل در داوری تجاری بین المللی
نوع مقاله : مقالات علمی پژوهشی
نویسندگان
1
دانشیار حقوق خصوصی، دانشکده حقوق وعلوم سیاسی دانشگاه تهران، تهران، ایران
2
دانشیار گروه حقوق خصوصی، دانشکده حقوق، دانشگاه تربیت مدرس، تهران، ایران
3
دانشجوی دکترای حقوق خصوصی، پردیس بینالمللی کیش دانشگاه تهران، تهران، ایران
چکیده
انعطاف ذاتی موجود در اداره ادله در داوری، طرفین و داوران را برآن داشته است در خصوص بهترین راه حل ممکن دراین فرآیند به توافق برسند، که این امرمنتج به نزدیک شدن نظامهای مختلف حقوقی دراین زمینه شده است. دراین راستا، طرفین داوری سعی میکنند بهترین الگوهای کاربردی را در حوزه ارائه ادله به کاربرند و داوران نیزغالباً تمایل دارند ادله را به شیوهای منسجم ارزیابی کنند، که این اقدام، مستقل ازملیت وخاستگاه طرفین صورت میگیرد. این عملکرد، هرچند به طورمعمول اجرا شده وبه تحریرنیزدرآمده است، اما به دلیل بیم تعارض با وصف انعطاف، هرگز به عنوان الزام مطرح نبوده است. معذلک، به نظر میرسد که نوعی استاندارد سازی منعطف، به این معنا که درصورت توافق طرفین، سکوت، اجمال وعدم مخالفت صریح، ضمنی وعرفی مرتبط با خطوط راهنما درقرارداد، آنها را حاکم برفرایند اداره ادله بدانیم- امری که با نهاد قواعد تکمیلی در نظام حقوق نوشته شباهت دارد- نهایتاً داوری را قابل پیشبینی ومطلوبتر میکند. این نوشتار، تلاشهای بینالمللی صورت گرفته جهت استانداردسازی اداره ادله رابررسی کرده است که تا کنون الزام آورنبودهاند و در ادامه چنین تبیین شده است که با اعطای نوعی الزام به خطوط راهنما همانند قواعد تکمیلی میتوان نوعی انسجام درعرصه اداره ادله ایجاد کرد که با وصف انعطاف نیز در تعارض نیست.
کلیدواژه‌ها
موضوعات
5-2. انگلیسی
2. Baum .A, “Reconciling anglo-saxon and civil law procedure, the path to a processural lex arbitrationis”, in, Liber Amicorum Karl Boeckstiegel, law of international business and dispute settlement in the 21st century,Germany, Carl Heymanns VerlagKG, 2001.
3. Blackaby. N, Partasides. C, Redfen. A, Hunter. M, On International Arbitration, Applicable Laws, 4th edition, London, Oxford University Press, 2009.
4. Born .G, International civil litigation in United States Courts, Commentary and Materials, 5th edition, The U.S.A, Wolters Kluwer, 1996.
5. Craig. W, Park. W, Paulsson. J, Craige, Park, Paulsson on International Chamber of commerce arbitration, 3th edition, Paris, Oceania Publishers, 2000.
6. El Ahdab. j, A. Bouchenaki, Discovery in international arbitration: a foreign creature for a civil lawyer, in, Arbitration Advocacy in Changing Times, edited by Albert Jan van den Berg, ICCA Congress Series, 2010,Rio volume 15, Kluwer Law International, 2011.
7. Finizio. S.P, “Discovery in international arbitration: Frankenstein’s Monster in the digital age”, in, the taking of evidence in international commercial arbitration, German Institution of Arbitration, Vol 26, 2010.
8. Fraga. M , The American Influence on International Arbitration – Doctrinal Developments an Discovery Methods, 3th edition, London, Cambridge University Press, 2009.
9. Goode. Roy, “The Concept of ‘Good Faith’ in English Law”, Centro di Studi e ricerche di diritt comparato e straniero, Paris, 1992.
10. Hafter. P, “The provisions on the discovery of internal documents in the IBA rules of 1999”, in, Global reflections on International law, Commerce and Dispute Resolution, Liber amicorum in honour of Robert Briner, ed. Gerald Aksen et al. Paris ICC Publish, 2004.
11. Hanotiau .B, Document production in international arbitration: A tentative definition of best practices, in, ICC International court of arbitration bulletin, special supplement: Document production in international arbitration, 3th edition, Paris, ICC publishing, 2003.
12. ICCA Congress Series, “Quo Vadis Arbitration?”, in, Albert Jan van den Berg, 50 Years of the New York Convention: ICCA International Arbitration Conference, Volume 14, Netherland, Kluwer Law International, 2009.
13. Kaufman-Kohler. G, Globalization of arbitral procedure, Paris, 36 Vand. J. Transnat’l L., 2003.
14. Nougein. H-J, Dupeyrê. R, Règles ET pratiques du droit français de l’arbitrage, 1th edition, Paris, Lextenso, 2012.
15. O’Malley. N, Rules of evidence in international arbitration, 2th edition, The U.S.A, Informa, 2012.
16. Patocchi .M, Meakin .L, “Procedure and the taking of evidence in international commercial arbitration – The interaction of Civil Law and Common Law Procedures”, Int’l Bus. L.J, 884, 1996.
17. Paulsson .j, “Cross-Enrichment of Public and Private Law Dispute Resolution Mechanism in the International Arena”, J.Int.Arb.9, n°1, 1999.
18. Redfern. A, Hunter .M, Law and practice of international commercial arbitration, 4th edition, London, Sweet & Maxwell, 2004.
19. Reymon. C, “Civil law and common law procedures: which is the more inquisitorial? A common lawyer's response”, Arb.int. 1989.
20. Ricci. E, Evidence in international arbitration: a synthetic glimpse ,in, Miguel Angel Fernandez-Ballesteros and David Arias (ed.) Liber amicorum Bernardo Cremades, ,1th edition, Paris, La Ley, 2010.
21. Riddick v. Thames Board Mills Limited, Court of Appeal, Lord Denning, M. Stephenson and Waller L.J.J 8, 9,10th February, 11th march 1977. 3 all E.R. 677 C.A.
22. Roger K. Ward, “The Flexibility of Evidentiary Rules in International Trade Dispute Arbitration Problems Posed to American-Trained Lawyers”, J Int’l Arb, Vol 13, 1996.
23. Rubino-Sammartano. M, “Rules of evidence in International Arbitration: A Need for Discipline and Harmonization”, 3 J Int’l Arb.87, 1986.
24. Sachs. K, Use of documents and discovery: fishing expeditions versus transparency and burden of proof, 1th edition, Paris, Zeitschrift für Schiedsverfahren, Schieds VZ, 2003.
25. Sandifer. D, Evidence before International Tribunals, 3th edition, The U.S.A, The Foundation Press, 1975.
26. Shore. L, Three Evidentiary Problems in international Arbitration, Poland, Schieds VZ, 2004.
27. The IBA Rules on the Taking of Evidence in International Arbitration: Revised version, adopted by the IBA on 29 May 2010, ASA Bulletin, Kluwer Law International, vol. 28, 2010.
28. Thorens. j, l’arbitre international au point de rencontre des traditions du droit civil et de la common law, in, Etudes de droit international en l’honneur de Pierre Lalive, édité par C. Dominicié, R. Patry, C. Reymond, Helbing et Lichtenhahn, 1993.
29. Von Segessen. G, The IBA Rules on the Taking of Evidence in International Arbitration: Revised version, adopterd by the IBA on 29 May 2010, ASA Bulletin, The U.S.A, Kluwer Law International, 2010.
30. Waincymer. j, Procedure and Evidence in International arbitration, 1th edition, Netherland, Wolters Kluwer, 2012.
5-3. فرانسه
31. De Boisséson. M, “Introduction comparative aux systems d’administration des preuves dans les pays de common law et les pays de tradition romaniste”, in, Taking of evidence in international arbitral proceedings, The Dossiers of the institute of international business and practice, international chamber of commerce, 1990
32. De Boisséson. M, Le droit français de l’arbitrage interne ET international, 1th edition, Paris, GLN Joly, 1990.
33. Derains. Y, “La pratique de l’administration de la preuve dans l’arbitrage commercial international”, Rev.Arb, Paris, 2004.
34. Hanotiau. B, “La production de documents dans l’arbitrage international, essai de définition des meilleures pratiques”, in, La production de documents dans l’arbitrage international - Supplément spécial, Bulletin de la Cour internationale d’arbitrage de la CCI, 2006
35. Smith.R .H, “Améliorer l’efficacité de la production de documents devant les tribunaux arbitraux – un point de vue Nord-Américain”, in, La production de documents dans l’arbitrage international - Supplément spécial, Bulletin de la Cour internationale d’arbitrage de la CCI, 2006.
36. Vidal .D, Droit français de l’arbitrage interne ET international, 2th edition, Paris, GualinoLextenso, 2012.
5-4. تارنما
37. http://www.cpradr.org/Resources/ALLCPRArticles/tabid/265/ID/614/CPR-Protocol-on-Disclosure-of-Documents-and-Presentation-of-Witnesses-in-Commercial-Arbitration.aspx
38. www.ibanet.org/publications/publications_IBA_guides_and_free_materials.aspx
39. http://www.unidroit.org/french/principles/civilprocedure/aliunidroitprinciples-f.pdf
2. Baum .A, “Reconciling anglo-saxon and civil law procedure, the path to a processural lex arbitrationis”, in, Liber Amicorum Karl Boeckstiegel, law of international business and dispute settlement in the 21st century,Germany, Carl Heymanns VerlagKG, 2001.
3. Blackaby. N, Partasides. C, Redfen. A, Hunter. M, On International Arbitration, Applicable Laws, 4th edition, London, Oxford University Press, 2009.
4. Born .G, International civil litigation in United States Courts, Commentary and Materials, 5th edition, The U.S.A, Wolters Kluwer, 1996.
5. Craig. W, Park. W, Paulsson. J, Craige, Park, Paulsson on International Chamber of commerce arbitration, 3th edition, Paris, Oceania Publishers, 2000.
6. El Ahdab. j, A. Bouchenaki, Discovery in international arbitration: a foreign creature for a civil lawyer, in, Arbitration Advocacy in Changing Times, edited by Albert Jan van den Berg, ICCA Congress Series, 2010,Rio volume 15, Kluwer Law International, 2011.
7. Finizio. S.P, “Discovery in international arbitration: Frankenstein’s Monster in the digital age”, in, the taking of evidence in international commercial arbitration, German Institution of Arbitration, Vol 26, 2010.
8. Fraga. M , The American Influence on International Arbitration – Doctrinal Developments an Discovery Methods, 3th edition, London, Cambridge University Press, 2009.
9. Goode. Roy, “The Concept of ‘Good Faith’ in English Law”, Centro di Studi e ricerche di diritt comparato e straniero, Paris, 1992.
10. Hafter. P, “The provisions on the discovery of internal documents in the IBA rules of 1999”, in, Global reflections on International law, Commerce and Dispute Resolution, Liber amicorum in honour of Robert Briner, ed. Gerald Aksen et al. Paris ICC Publish, 2004.
11. Hanotiau .B, Document production in international arbitration: A tentative definition of best practices, in, ICC International court of arbitration bulletin, special supplement: Document production in international arbitration, 3th edition, Paris, ICC publishing, 2003.
12. ICCA Congress Series, “Quo Vadis Arbitration?”, in, Albert Jan van den Berg, 50 Years of the New York Convention: ICCA International Arbitration Conference, Volume 14, Netherland, Kluwer Law International, 2009.
13. Kaufman-Kohler. G, Globalization of arbitral procedure, Paris, 36 Vand. J. Transnat’l L., 2003.
14. Nougein. H-J, Dupeyrê. R, Règles ET pratiques du droit français de l’arbitrage, 1th edition, Paris, Lextenso, 2012.
15. O’Malley. N, Rules of evidence in international arbitration, 2th edition, The U.S.A, Informa, 2012.
16. Patocchi .M, Meakin .L, “Procedure and the taking of evidence in international commercial arbitration – The interaction of Civil Law and Common Law Procedures”, Int’l Bus. L.J, 884, 1996.
17. Paulsson .j, “Cross-Enrichment of Public and Private Law Dispute Resolution Mechanism in the International Arena”, J.Int.Arb.9, n°1, 1999.
18. Redfern. A, Hunter .M, Law and practice of international commercial arbitration, 4th edition, London, Sweet & Maxwell, 2004.
19. Reymon. C, “Civil law and common law procedures: which is the more inquisitorial? A common lawyer's response”, Arb.int. 1989.
20. Ricci. E, Evidence in international arbitration: a synthetic glimpse ,in, Miguel Angel Fernandez-Ballesteros and David Arias (ed.) Liber amicorum Bernardo Cremades, ,1th edition, Paris, La Ley, 2010.
21. Riddick v. Thames Board Mills Limited, Court of Appeal, Lord Denning, M. Stephenson and Waller L.J.J 8, 9,10th February, 11th march 1977. 3 all E.R. 677 C.A.
22. Roger K. Ward, “The Flexibility of Evidentiary Rules in International Trade Dispute Arbitration Problems Posed to American-Trained Lawyers”, J Int’l Arb, Vol 13, 1996.
23. Rubino-Sammartano. M, “Rules of evidence in International Arbitration: A Need for Discipline and Harmonization”, 3 J Int’l Arb.87, 1986.
24. Sachs. K, Use of documents and discovery: fishing expeditions versus transparency and burden of proof, 1th edition, Paris, Zeitschrift für Schiedsverfahren, Schieds VZ, 2003.
25. Sandifer. D, Evidence before International Tribunals, 3th edition, The U.S.A, The Foundation Press, 1975.
26. Shore. L, Three Evidentiary Problems in international Arbitration, Poland, Schieds VZ, 2004.
27. The IBA Rules on the Taking of Evidence in International Arbitration: Revised version, adopted by the IBA on 29 May 2010, ASA Bulletin, Kluwer Law International, vol. 28, 2010.
28. Thorens. j, l’arbitre international au point de rencontre des traditions du droit civil et de la common law, in, Etudes de droit international en l’honneur de Pierre Lalive, édité par C. Dominicié, R. Patry, C. Reymond, Helbing et Lichtenhahn, 1993.
29. Von Segessen. G, The IBA Rules on the Taking of Evidence in International Arbitration: Revised version, adopterd by the IBA on 29 May 2010, ASA Bulletin, The U.S.A, Kluwer Law International, 2010.
30. Waincymer. j, Procedure and Evidence in International arbitration, 1th edition, Netherland, Wolters Kluwer, 2012.
5-3. فرانسه
31. De Boisséson. M, “Introduction comparative aux systems d’administration des preuves dans les pays de common law et les pays de tradition romaniste”, in, Taking of evidence in international arbitral proceedings, The Dossiers of the institute of international business and practice, international chamber of commerce, 1990
32. De Boisséson. M, Le droit français de l’arbitrage interne ET international, 1th edition, Paris, GLN Joly, 1990.
33. Derains. Y, “La pratique de l’administration de la preuve dans l’arbitrage commercial international”, Rev.Arb, Paris, 2004.
34. Hanotiau. B, “La production de documents dans l’arbitrage international, essai de définition des meilleures pratiques”, in, La production de documents dans l’arbitrage international - Supplément spécial, Bulletin de la Cour internationale d’arbitrage de la CCI, 2006
35. Smith.R .H, “Améliorer l’efficacité de la production de documents devant les tribunaux arbitraux – un point de vue Nord-Américain”, in, La production de documents dans l’arbitrage international - Supplément spécial, Bulletin de la Cour internationale d’arbitrage de la CCI, 2006.
36. Vidal .D, Droit français de l’arbitrage interne ET international, 2th edition, Paris, GualinoLextenso, 2012.
5-4. تارنما
37. http://www.cpradr.org/Resources/ALLCPRArticles/tabid/265/ID/614/CPR-Protocol-on-Disclosure-of-Documents-and-Presentation-of-Witnesses-in-Commercial-Arbitration.aspx
38. www.ibanet.org/publications/publications_IBA_guides_and_free_materials.aspx
39. http://www.unidroit.org/french/principles/civilprocedure/aliunidroitprinciples-f.pdf
