論非機構仲裁於我國仲裁法下的相關問題──由最高法院一○三年度台抗字第二三六號民事裁定談起

Related Issues about Institutional Arbitration and Ad Hoc Arbitration

本文由最高法院一○三年度台抗字第二三六號民事裁定出發，說明目前部分實務混淆機構仲裁、非機構仲裁、仲裁人及仲裁協會等相關概念，致誤解機構仲裁與非機構仲裁之意義及判斷標準。再由非機構仲裁判斷應否與機構仲裁判斷相同，具有與確定判決相同之效力，並得向法院申請執行裁定等方向，提出本文結論。

This paper begins with a discussion of Supreme Court Ruling 103 Tai-Kan-Tze 236 (2014) to show that some courts in their rulings or judgments confused the concepts of institutional arbitration, ad hoc arbitration, arbitrator and arbitral institution, and therefore misinterpreted the meaning of institutional and ad hoc arbitration. This paper concludes that both institutional and ad hoc arbitration awards should have the effect of res iudicata as a final and inappealable judgment and are eligible for an order for recognition and enforcement in Taiwan.