译文：“管辖权：所有因此提单产生的争议应按照中华人民共和国法律在中华人民共和国法院审理或在中华人民共和国仲裁。”铁行渣华有限公司与华兴海运(中国)托运有限公司事后没有关于仲裁的补充协议。
2000年2月15日，铁行渣华有限公司和铁行渣华(香港)有限公司向中华人民共和国广州海事法院提出申请，请求法院确认提单仲裁条款无效。对此，华兴海运(中国)托运有限公司认为该提单背面条款第2条规定了“管辖权”，该司法管辖条款是有效的，反请求法院裁定该提单中第2条中关于法律适用和司法管辖部分有效。
审理该案的合议庭认为：本案属涉外案件，对仲裁协议的效力作出认定，属于程序性问题，依照我国1986年12月2日加入的《承认与执行外国仲裁裁决公约》第5条第1项规定的精神，确定仲裁协议效力的准据法的基本原则是：首先应适用当事人约定的准据法，如当事人未约定准据法，则应适用仲裁地的法律。本案中，对于认定本案所涉仲裁协议效力的法律适用，本案当事人确定的准据法均是中华人民共和国法律，故本案应适用中华人民共和国法律。
合议庭同时认为：74/9805LD02号提单背面条款第2条是一个管辖权条款。一项争议的解决如果约定了提交仲裁，那么它本身应排斥诉讼，仲裁与诉讼不能同时进行，否则就违背了仲裁制度的根本原则。在本案所涉管辖权条款中，当事人既约定了进行仲裁又约定了进行诉讼，该仲裁协议应认定无效。至于华兴海运(中国)托运有限公司请求法院裁定该提单中的法律适用和司法管辖条款有效问题，由于铁行渣华有限公司、铁行渣华(香港)有限公司并没有要求本院对此进行确认，不属本案审理的范围，应另行处理。
2．何谓国际商事仲裁？国际商事仲裁有哪些特点？
3．何谓国际商事仲裁协议？如何确定一项国际商事仲裁协议的有效性？ 4．试述国际商事仲裁协议的效力。 5．何谓仲裁条款自治理论。
6．何谓非当地化理论？非当地化理论有哪些进步意义？
7．如何确定国际商事仲裁中实体问题和程序问题的法律适用？ 8．试述我国的国际商事仲裁裁决异议制度及其完善。
9．试述我国的国际商事仲裁裁决承认与执行制度及其完善。
【扩展性阅读材料】 1.郭玉军、肖芳：《网上仲裁的现状与未来》，《法学评论》2003年第2期。 2.宋连斌、黄进：《〈中华人民共和国仲裁法〉（建议修改稿）》，《法学评论》2003年第4期。 3.邓杰：《英国关于仲裁协议书面形式的立法发展及其对海事仲裁的影响》，《法制与社会发展》2001年第5期。 4.邓杰：《论仲裁庭管辖权自决原则》，《中国国际私法与比较法年刊》第5卷,法律出版社2002年版。 5.李双元、谢石松：《国际民事诉讼法概论》，武汉大学出版社2001年第2版，第491－584页。 6. 韩健：《现代国际商事仲裁法的理论与实践》，法律出版社2000年版。
7.宋连斌：《国际商事仲裁管辖权研究》，法律出版社2000年版。 8．刘晓红：《国际商事仲裁协议的法理与实证》，商务印书馆2005年版。 9.赵健：《国际商事仲裁的司法监督》，法律出版社2000年版。 10．邓杰：《商事仲裁法理论与实务》，兰州大学出版社2005年版。 11．高菲：《中国海事仲裁的理论与实践》，中国人民大学出版社1998年版。
24
12.About International Arbitration A. Description of Arbitration:
With the rapid growth and expansion of the world financial and business communities, it is increasingly important for businesses to have an established method of resolving business disputes quickly, efficiently and constructively.
When disputes arise in the course of business, parties often prefer to settle them privately and informally, in a businesslike fashion that will enable them to maintain their business relationship.
Arbitration is designed for just such occasions, in that it can be designed for quick, practical and efficient resolution.
Arbitration is a voluntary process of dispute resolution where a neutral third party renders a final and binding decision after each side has an opportunity to present its view. This method is especially useful in international business transactions where parties are often unfamiliar with foreign legal systems.
Unlike a judicial process, arbitration is conducted outside the court system by impartial arbitrators who are selected by the parties based on criteria that best fits the nature of the contract. Arbitration is usually conducted by either one arbitrator or a panel of three arbitrators with the structure, format, site and scope of arbitration all decided by the parties and memorialized in the arbitration clause of their contract. The parties usually negotiate the arbitration clause at the same time they develop the initial contract. A properly structured provision will help establish a framework for expeditious resolution of contract disputes.
Arbitration allows the parties greater flexibility than a court proceeding. Parties can decide to have abbreviated time periods in which to respond to claims, where the arbitration will be conducted, how formal the process will be, or whether to involve lawyers in the arbitration.
B. Advantages of Arbitration over Litigation:
1. Impartiality of Decision Maker -- Where a party is concerned that a court in another country may not be neutral, arbitration allows parties chose the arbitrators who will decide the matter;
2. Enforceability of Arbitral Awards -- Arbitration awards are final and can be challenged only under very limited circumstances;
3. Confidentiality -- Where arbitration proceedings and awards are normally private, court proceedings and judgments are frequently public; 4. Expertise -- Parties may choose arbitrators with technical backgrounds who will understand the specific issues in the case;
5. Limited Discovery -- Because the parties may choose to limit discovery in their arbitration, arbitration can be less burdensome; 6. Expense -- Arbitration is usually less expensive than litigation;
7. Brevity -- Arbitration usually produces a resolution more quickly than litigation; and,
8. Relationships -- Arbitration may be viewed as less adversarial, thereby preserving long-term business relationships. C. Kinds of Disputes Subject to Arbitration:
Generally speaking, there is a two-step process to determine if a controversy is arbitrable: 24
http://www.osec.doc.gov/ogc/occic/arb-98.html, visited on March 22.2007.
First, parties should specify in an arbitration agreement or in an arbitration clause of a contract whether disputes will be subject to arbitration; second, the parties should consider that the law of the country in which the arbitration takes place may prohibit arbitration for certain types of disputes. Arbitration for commercial matters, however, is normally encouraged.
The types of disputes that are considered arbitrable varies among countries. In the United States, courts have strongly favored arbitration in the resolution of international business disputes. They have held that almost all civil disputes can be arbitrated and have denied arbitration only where Congress has expressly stated that the provisions of a specific law can be enforced only in the courts.
D. The Agreement to Arbitrate
Arbitration agreements are formed at one of two points in time: during the negotiation of a contract, or after a legal dispute arises. Because the contract negotiation process offers greater opportunity to develop an arbitration format without the acrimony that can develop after a controversy arises, inclusion of an arbitration agreement as a clause in a contract is preferable and can streamline the dispute resolution process. The arbitration agreement is generally incorporated into the contract governing the transaction.
E. Elements of the Arbitration Agreement
The following elements should be considered for inclusion in any arbitration agreement:
1. Scope of Arbitration - The parties should explicitly state the matters that they want the arbitration agreement to cover. However, they should be aware that local law may restrict issues that may be subject to arbitration.
2. Choice of Arbitrator(s)
a. The clause must specify the selection process, otherwise statutes and rules may fill any gaps;
b. If institutional rules are used that provide for selection of arbitrators, no further reference to selection may be necessary;
c. A panel of three arbitrators is standard for international commercial arbitrations, with the parties each appointing one, and the parties or arbitrators selecting a third. In some circumstances an appointing authority will designate any missing members (e.g. where one of the parties refuses to select an arbitrator as a dilatory tactic);
d. A sole arbitrator may be preferable for disputes involving smaller amounts; and,
e. If an arbitrator must have a special skill, it should be specified in the arbitration agreement. 3. Choice of Law
a. The parties should designate the substantive law that will be applied in the arbitration;
b. The parties may select a procedural law. If they do not, the procedural law of the place where the arbitration occurs will apply; and, c. Absent an express choice of applicable law, the law of the place of the arbitration will be applied. 4. Choice of Location
a. A forum country should be selected that is a signatory to an international arbitration convention (i.e., the New York or Panama Conventions);
b. The location determines the extent of potential assistance, or even interference, by national courts during an arbitral proceeding and it may affect enforcement of the award;
c. Practical features such as facilities, communications and transportation systems, freedom of movement of persons, documents and currency, and support services should be considered; and,
d. The choice of location in the arbitration agreement should include the name of both the city and country.
5. Choice of Language - Parties may designate one language as the official language of the proceedings and allow simultaneous interpretation into another
language.
6. Choice of Rules - Parties should specify the rules of procedure that will govern the arbitration process.
If selecting institutional rules to govern the arbitration, parties should consider whether those rules provide for: a. The selection of a site where it is not specified in the arbitration clause; b. Assessment of costs, including allocation between parties; c. Selection of arbitrators;
d. Powers given to the arbitrator;
e. The language in which the proceeding will be conducted; f. The substantive law to be applied; g. The use of experts;
h. The time allowed to arbitrators to make awards;
i. The power of any administering authority over the awards; j. The availability of provisional relief; and,
k. Flexibility to allow parties to opt out of certain provisions.
If the parties do not use institutional rules, the following items should be included in their own ad hoc rules: a. Procedure to initiate arbitration proceedings;
b. Means for dealing with the refusal of a party to proceed with arbitration; c. Scope and limitation of discovery;
d. Outline of hearing procedures, including notice and form of the award (whether it must be written out with reasons for the decision); and, e. Procedures for enforcement of the award.
7. Interim Relief -- Some arbitration rules specifically address matters of interim relief, i.e., whether the parties may apply to a court for a preliminary injunction, an order of attachment or other order preserving the status quo until the arbitrator(s) decide the case. The rules of most arbitration institutions provide that resorting to a court in such circumstances is not incompatible with, or a waiver of, the right to arbitrate under their rules. Moreover, most rules allow the arbitrators to order such relief.
8. Costs -- The arbitration agreement should provide for the allocation of costs.
9. Award of Tribunal -- The agreement should specify that a majority of the arbitrators must agree on an award and that it must be based on applicable law. The agreement should also specify the currency for payment of the award. If the award is to be recognized and enforced internationally, it may need to state reasons and legal basis, including reference to the process by which the legal basis was selected. Some awards contain no reasoning or written report.