仲裁判斷背於公序良俗之司法審查

Judicial Review for Arbitration Award with the Criterion of Public Order and Good Morals

仲裁判斷在何情形下背於我國公共秩序或善良風俗（我國公序良俗）？公序良俗之內涵為何？關於仲裁判斷是否背於公序良俗，應如何司法審查？仲裁法現行條文應如何解釋、適用？現行條文有無增修之必要？本文嘗試就我國法院對於我國仲裁判斷與外國仲裁判斷進行公序良俗之司法審查，分別論述，並提出若干分析及建議供參。
我國法院對於我國仲裁判斷進行公序良俗審查之依據為仲裁法第38條第3款規定，對於外國仲裁判斷審查之依據，則為仲裁法第49條第1項第1款規定，兩者均應限縮及嚴格解釋，且原則上均不要求仲裁庭正確認事用法。又仲裁法第49條第1項第1款所稱之「中華民國公共秩序或善良風俗」，與紐約公約第5條第2項第（b）款之「公共政策」有所關聯，因此，國際間關於紐約公約所稱「公共政策」之解釋與實例，足供我國司法實務之參考。

First paragraph(1) of Article 49 of ROC Arbitration Law stipulated,“The court shall issue a dismissal with respect to an application submitted by a party for recognition of a foreign arbitral award, if such award contains one of the following elements：(1)Where the recognition or enforcement of the arbitral award is contrary to the public order or good morals of the Republic of China”, which was patterned after Article V(2)(b)of New York Convention,“Recognition and enforcement of an arbitral award may also be refused if the competent authority in the country where recognition and enforcement is sought finds that：(b) The recognition or enforcement of the award would be contrary to the public policy of that country”. However, the concept of“public policy”is vague and uncertain. Though there is general acceptance regarding public policy on a conceptual level, conflicting views regarding the applicability of public policy still diverse. In this paper, I will explore the application and categories of such a concept in domestic and foreign occasions. A comparative study of different courts’interpretations will be examined. I hope this paper will be helpful to our judge’s interpretation and application with ROC Arbitration Law.