仲裁判斷效力之主觀範圍——以關係企業間之擴張為中心

Abstract

仲裁作為重要之商務紛爭解決機制，仲裁判斷效力主觀範圍一方面存在擴張之必要性，另方面亦面臨到與我國仲裁法規範文義及「合意原則」之緊張關係；此外，關係企業一方面因其於經濟上構成一個巨大實體而存在對其擴張仲裁判斷效力之必要性，另方面亦承受有獨立法人格作為公司法制基礎之規範張力。認識到上開問題意識，就仲裁判斷效力主觀範圍擴張之緊張關係，本文回顧我國實務與學說之相關見解，並觀察德國法、法國法、日本法、美國法、國際仲裁（實質）法上之相關見解，經釐清分析後本文認為，我國仲裁法規範文義非決定性，「合意原則」非擴張阻礙，應目的性擴張仲裁法第37條第1項與第47條第2項，使仲裁判斷效力及於民事訴訟法第401條與強制執行法第4條之2所列之人，並類推適用第三人撤銷訴訟規定賦予事後程序保障。就仲裁判斷效力對關係企業擴張之規範張力，本文回顧我國實務與學說之相關見解，並觀察日本法與美國法上之相關見解，經釐清分析後本文認為，於關係企業非典型繼受人、占有人或被擔當人之情形，倘關係企業符合欠缺公司形式、業務或財務非獨立、資本不足或規避義務等情事，得透過「揭穿公司面紗原則」對關係企業擴張仲裁判斷效力，（類推）適用民事訴訟法第401條或強制執行法第4條之2，又關於對關係企業擴張仲裁判斷效力之判定程序，應依所涉及者為既判力或執行力，分別於「成為爭點之後程序」或「許可執行之訴」與「債務人（執行當事人不適格）異議之訴」為之。

As arbitration has become an important mechanism for the resolution of commercial disputes, the subjective scope of the effects of arbitral awards presents a dual challenge. On the one hand, there is a need to extend the effects of arbitral awards beyond the parties to the arbitration. On the other hand, such extension gives rise to tension with both the wording of the Arbitration Law and the principle of consent. Similarly, in the context of affiliated companies, there is, on the one hand, a need to extend the effects of arbitral awards to such companies because they economically constitute a single, large entity, while, on the other hand, such extension gives rise to normative tension with the principle of separate corporate personality as a foundation of corporate law. Against this background, this thesis first examines the tension surrounding the extension of the subjective effects of arbitral awards. It reviews the relevant Taiwanese judicial decisions and academic commentary, and further analyzes the approaches adopted under German, French, Japanese, and U.S. law, as well as international substantive arbitration rules. This thesis argues that the wording of the Arbitration Law is not determinative, nor does the principle of consent constitute an insurmountable obstacle to extending the effects of arbitral awards. Rather, Articles 37(1) and 47(2) of the Arbitration Law should be interpreted purposively so that the effects of arbitral awards extend to the persons specified in Article 401 of the Code of Civil Procedure and Article 4-2 of the Compulsory Enforcement Act. To safeguard the procedural rights of such persons, the provisions governing third-party opposition actions to revoke judgments should be applied by analogy. This thesis further examines the extension of the effects of arbitral awards to affiliated companies. After reviewing the relevant Taiwanese case law and scholarly opinions, together with the approaches adopted in Japan and the United States, this thesis concludes that, where an affiliated company does not fall within the conventional categories of a successor, possessor, or represented party, the effects of an arbitral award may be extended to that affiliated company through the doctrine of piercing the corporate veil, provided that circumstances such as the absence of genuine corporate form, the lack of independence in business operations or financial affairs, undercapitalization, or the use of the corporate form to evade legal obligations are established. In such cases, Article 401 of the Code of Civil Procedure or Article 4-2 of the Compulsory Enforcement Act may be applied (by analogy). Furthermore, depending on whether the issue concerns the res judicata effect or the enforceability of the arbitral award, the determination of whether such effects may be extended to an affiliated company should be made, respectively, in subsequent proceedings in which the issue arises, or in an enforcement permission suit or an objection suit on the ground that the judgment debtor lacks standing as the proper enforcement party.