仲裁员与仲裁当事人法律关系模型的困境及其解决

英国法传统上将仲裁员与仲裁当事人之间的法律关系视为合同关系。根据《德国仲裁法》,仲裁员合同是通过仲裁当事人与仲裁员之间的要约与承诺形成的。在排除公权力干预的前提下,对争议进行公正、有效的仲裁,也包括确保仲裁员的独立性和公正性不受仲裁员与双方仲裁当事人法律关系影响,是仲裁员、指定仲裁员的仲裁当事人以及对方当事人的共同利益诉求。仲裁员追求的经济利益,超出对方仲裁当事人所预期承担的部分的利益诉求,即便存在仲裁员与指定仲裁员的仲裁当事人之间的合意,也应当服从于对争议进行公正、有效仲裁的诉求。仅从合同法出发解释仲裁员与仲裁当事人法律关系将无法满足仲裁员和双方仲裁当事人在仲裁方面共同的关于仲裁公正、有效地进行以及取得恰当的经济利益的利益诉求。仲裁员与仲裁当事人之间的法律关系是一个复合的法律关系,包含了以提供仲裁服务为标的的合同法律关系和以作出仲裁裁决为标的的身份法律关系,前者的依据是以仲裁员为一方,以双方当事人为另一方的双方当事人合意,后者的依据是法律的相关规定。

The Dilemma and Its Solution of the Legal Relationship between Arbitrators and Parties in Dispute

In accordance with the British law, the legal relationship between arbitrators and parties in dis-pute is traditionally considered to be contractual. According to the German Arbitration Law, the arbitrator＇scontract is formed between the arbitrator and parties in dispute by means of offer and acceptance. Upon exclu-sion of interference from public power, the common interest among the arbitrator, the party who appoints thearbitrator and the other party is to guarantee an impartial and effective arbitration over disputes and to ensurethe independence and impartiality of arbitrators not be affected by the legal relationship between the arbitratorand parties in dispute. Where the economic interest pursued by the arbitrators exceeds the expected obligationof the other party in dispute, despite an agreement has been concluded between the arbitrator and the partywho appoints the arbitrator, the pursuit of an impartial and effective arbitration shall prevail. Therefore, theinterpretation of the legal relationship between the arbitrator and parties in dispute from contract law cannotsatisfy the pursuit of impartial and effective arbitration as well as their proper economic interest. The legal rela-tionship between the arbitrator and parties in dispute is compound, which includes the contractual relation ofproviding arbitration services and the status relation to confer arbitration awards. The former is based on the a-greement between the arbitrator and parties in dispute; the latter is based on pertinent legal rules.