法學期刊
  • 社群分享
論著名稱:
線上仲裁程序的程序公平性問題-以線上消費仲裁為例(The Issue of Procedural Fairness in Online Arbitral Proceedings-An Examination of Online Consumer Arbitration)
文獻引用
編著譯者: 高啟中
出版日期: 2006.03
刊登出處: 台灣/月旦財經法雜誌第 4 期/95-147 頁
頁  數: 36 點閱次數: 1240
下載點數: 144 點 銷售明細: 權利金查詢 變更售價
授 權 者: 高啟中
關 鍵 詞: 網際網路線上爭端解決線上仲裁程序公平性自我規範標準
中文摘要: 程序公平係進行網路仲裁程序的先決要件。程序公平的概念源自自然正義與正當法律程序原則。實踐程序公平應包含下列要素:仲裁人的獨立性與公正性、正當的程序告知、提交證據的權利、取得相關資訊的途徑、參與聽審的權利,以及程序的透明化。
就仲裁人的獨立性與公正性而言,仲裁人的揭露義務,與配套的迴避程序,應予以落實。大多數內國仲裁法,包括台灣現行之仲裁法,對此部分均有詳盡之規範。為保障爭端當事人在線上程序中充分陳述其案由之權利,應准許其利用適當之線上通訊機制。揭示程序、聽審、證據之提交與調查,在合理程序費用範圍內,均可透過此等線上通訊機制進行。由於線上仲裁尚在起步階段,尤其依台灣現行仲裁法與仲裁協會之仲裁規則,對是否能透過網路進行線上程序,並不明確。線上仲裁的程序公正性能否在台灣落實,尚有疑義。又,一般消費者欠缺法律專業知識,可能導致其不知如何利用相關程序保障自身權益,故有提供法律上協助之必要。法律義務服務,以及仲裁機構提供之程序指南,有助於減輕此種當事人劣勢。以台灣而言,若透過律師公會,仲裁協會或各大學法律系普遍舉辦之免費法律服務,對弱勢當事人或可有所助益。
線上仲裁中的程序公平保障,主要係依賴仲裁機構的自我規範。實際上的落實有待監督。仲裁機構的自我監督與政府機關的行政監督均有其缺失。透過由各利害關係團體組成之非政府組織來進行監督,並協助制定更完善的程序規範,是較為理想的方案。
英文關鍵詞: InternetOnline dispute resolutionOnline arbitrationProcedural fairnessSelf-regulating standards
英文摘要: Procedural fairness is a prerequisite in online arbitral proceedings. The principle of procedural fairness is derived from the notion of natural justice and the doctrine of due process of law. To satisfy procedural fairness the following elements should be implemented in online arbitration: the impartiality and independence of the arbitrators, reasonable notice of the process, the right to present evidence, access to relevant information, the right to a hearing, and transparency of the process.
With regard to the impartiality and independence of the arbitrators, disclosure and challenge procedures must be available to the parties. These procedures are stipulated intensively under most national legislations, including the Taiwanese Arbitration Act. The parties' right to present their case could be assisted with the use of various online communication tools. The conducting of discovery, hearing and evidence presentation over the Internet are practicable and should be allowed on the basis of reasonable procedural cost. As online arbitration is still in its infancy, under certain jurisdictions, such as Taiwan, where there is neither arbitration provision nor arbitral rule concerning the conducting of online arbitration, the actual implementation of procedural fairness might raise doubt. The【月旦財經法雜誌第4期,2006年3月,第95頁】provision of legal assistance in online arbitral proceedings is crucial as some disputants' ability to invoke certain procedures may be undermined due to their lack of legal expertise. Pro bono services, procedural guidelines and instructions can help mitigate this disadvantage. In Taiwan, for example, pro bono services provided by various bar associations, arbitration institutions, and legal clinics of the law schools can be helpful.
The implementation of procedural fairness is primarily self-regulating. The actual implementation of these procedural standards must be supervised. Internal self-monitoring and external government supervision are not satisfactory. An external supervisory body comprised of relevant stake-holders could be a competent entity to develop further procedural standards and monitor the implementation of such standards.
目  次: I. Introduction
II. The Principle of Procedural Fairness
A. The Notion of procedural Fairness
B. The Fundamental Elements of Procedural Fairness
III. Implementing Procedural Fairness in Online Arbitral Proceedings
A. Ensuring Independence and Impartiality of the Arbitrator
B. Implementing the Disputant's Right to Present His Case
C. Assistance for Consumers in Online Arbitral Proceedings
IV. Monitoring the Implementation of Procedural Fairness
A. Internal Self-monitoring
B. External Monitoring by Governments
C. External Monitoring by Non-governmental Supervisory Organizations
V. Conclusion
相關法條:
相關判解:
相關函釋:
相關論著:
高啟中,線上仲裁程序的程序公平性問題-以線上消費仲裁為例,月旦財經法雜誌,第 4 期,95-147 頁,2006年03月。
返回功能列