| 摘要: |
| 仲裁时效和诉讼时效的立法价值存在差异,仲裁时效涉及的公共利益范围较窄,更注重维护当事人意思自治。约定仲裁时效期间的性质不属于附期限的仲裁协议,而是当事人对相对权的处分,这表明约定仲裁时效期间并没有超越权利行使的合理范围。约定仲裁时效期间能够克服时效法定性的瑕疵,有利于推动仲裁的高效进行。应允许当事人在一定范围内约定较短或较长的时效期间。在较短时效期间届满后,当事人仍然有权向人民法院起诉。 |
| 关键词: 仲裁时效 诉讼时效 时效期间的法定性 公共政策 意思自治 |
| DOI：10.13216/j.cnki.upcjess.2019.03.0007 |
| 分类号:D925.7 |
| 基金项目:国家社会科学基金专项课题(18VS5049);国家留学基金委员会联合培养博士研究生项目资助(201806270072) |
|
| Analysis of Agreement on Limitation Period of Arbitration |
|
PU Yuntao
|
|
(School of Law, Wuhan University, Wuhan, Hubei 420072, China)
|
| Abstract: |
| The legal value of arbitration limitation is different from that of limitation of action. The scope of public interest involved in arbitration limitation is narrower and more emphasis is laid on party autonomy. The nature of agreement on limitation period of arbitration is disposal of relative right, instead of arbitration agreement with a time limitation, which indicates that agreement on limitation period of arbitration is not abuse of rights. Agreement on limitation period can overcome the side effect of non-variability of period of limitation and is beneficial to arbitration efficiency. The parties shall be allowed to have agreement of a longer or a shorter limitation period within a certain range. After the expiration of the shorter limitation period, the parties still have the right to file suits in courts. |
| Key words: time limitation of arbitration limitation of action non-variability of period of limitation public policy party autonomy |
