國際商事仲裁上仲裁判斷既判力之研究準據法及主、客觀範圍為中心

Res Judicata Effects of Arbitral Awards in International Commercial Arbitration: Focusing on the Governing Law and its Objective and Subjective Scope

在國際商事交易上，不論於COVID-19疫情前後，仲裁均係最受偏好之紛爭解決手段。而國際商事仲裁能發揮功能之重要基礎之一，係仲裁判斷之既判力。儘管國際商事仲裁判斷應有其既判力一事，係比較法上之共識，但應如何劃定其主、客觀範圍，則饒富爭議，而有待釐清；此涉及以下兩個層次的問題：應否於國際商事仲裁判斷所牽涉之複數法秩序中，依如何之標準選擇其一為仲裁判斷既判力之準據法？如是，則第二，應否鑑於仲裁與訴訟在審判主體、程序構造及審理基本原則上之差異，緩和仲裁判斷與法院判決之等價性，而不全然以相同標準決定既判力之範圍？我國既以對外貿易立國，而必須健全化國際仲裁制度，自亦應對於前揭問題有所回應。為此，本文擬一面回顧我國學說、實務之討論狀況，一面比較德國、法國法及國際法協會建言之規範狀態，嘗試針對我國仲裁法第37條第1項、第47條第2項之規定，指出其解釋適用之方向。

Arbitration has been the most preferred dispute resolution method in international commercial transactions, both before and after the COVID-19 pandemic. The international commercial arbitration would not function without res judicata effects of arbitral awards. It is thus generally accepted in all of the relevant legal systems that international commercial arbitral awards have res judicata effects. However, in terms of the objective and subjective scope of res judicata effects, there are various approaches to be identified; in other words, the issue of how to delineate the scope of res judicata effects of arbitral awards remains highly controversial. In this regard, the following two related questions arise and need to be answered: first, among the different jurisdictions involved in an international commercial arbitration, should any national law of them govern the res judicata effects of the arbitral award? And if this is the case, then which one should govern? If not, is there any applicable transnational rules? Secondly, provided that the choice of national laws should be made, should the res judicata effects of arbitral awards follow the same rule applicable for court judgments, in spite of all the differences between arbitration and civil procedure? To which extent an arbitral award is equivalent to a court judgment as regards the res judicata effects? Since Taiwan is a country relying on foreign trade and must consequently establish an efficient international arbitration system, the aforementioned questions should also be addressed. To this end, this article will review the discussions in the local literature and case law on the one hand, and do a comparative study on German law, French law and the ILA Recommendations on Res Judicata and Arbitration on the other hand. The aim of this article lies in providing a guideline for the application of Article 37(1) and 47(2) of the Arbitration Law of ROC, which will promote the legal certainty of Taiwanese international arbitration law.