过去一年，中国仲裁继续向专业化、国际化的方向发展。我们与领先仲裁机构的负责人聊了聊机构的改革创新、国际化之路，《仲裁法》意见稿将带来的影响以及下一步发展策略。
2021年，中国仲裁机构受理案件超41.5万件，标的额达8500余亿元，额度再创新高。这一年，中国的仲裁机构总数超过270家，中国也成为了运用仲裁方式解决民商事纠纷最多的国家之一。
近期，中国仲裁领域发展呈现颇多亮点：2021年7月，《中华人民共和国仲裁法（修订）》（征求意见稿）正式对外发布；仲裁机构体制机制改革加速；专业化仲裁快速发展；内港澳三地在仲裁领域的协助机制也得到进一步优化升级。
谈到过去一年机构受理案件情况的变化，受访仲裁机构负责人都提到了案件数量及标的额增长、案件类型创新，以及案件国际化程度提升等特点。
例如中国国际经济贸易仲裁委员会（“贸仲”），2021年受理案件4071件，同比增长12.61%，争议金额连续四年突破千亿元大关，其中涉外案件争议金额个案平均高达9千万元，争议金额一亿元以上案件182件；深圳国际仲裁院（“深国仲”）2021年受理仲裁案件7036件，案件争议金额超过856亿元，同比增长38.93%；上海国际经济贸易仲裁委员会（上海国际仲裁中心，“上海国仲”）的案件数量、争议金额和个案平均争议金额也都再创新高，其中案均争议金额超过2300万元。
在案件类型上，仲裁以其高效、灵活的特点反映了诸多社会热点议题。“有新冠疫情影响下医疗设备、核酸检测设备生产与经销纠纷；受金融监管政策收紧影响产生的债券违约、私募基金‘爆雷’、地产企业破产纠纷；气候环境治理相关的新能源汽车开发、能耗技术改革等纠纷；以及文化娱乐产业相关的品牌代言、电子竞技选手转会、网络主播与直播平台等纠纷。”上海国仲秘书长王唯骏分享道。
案件类型多样化、新兴领域案件增长呈亮点也是贸仲去年的受案特色。贸仲副主任兼秘书长王承杰指出，去年贸仲受理案件争议类型共21种，“金融创新类案件增幅达50%以上，建筑工程案件增幅达36%，特许经营、文娱产业等类型争议增幅达一倍以上，知识产权、能源资源、中外合资、房屋土地及房地产、委托合同类纠纷也均有增长”。
在深国仲，院长刘晓春告诉ALB，2021年深国仲主要案件类型依次为金融类案件（占36%）、国际和国内贸易类案件（占16%）、房地产及基础设施与建筑工程类案件（占14%），其中证券和资本市场类案件占比19%，争议金额超过400亿元，主要纠纷类型包括：证券类、基金类、股权投资类、资产管理类、融资融券类、委托理财类、期货类、信托类等。
国际化程度提升则是仲裁案件呈现出的另一特点。贸仲去年受理的涉外案件达636件，双方均为境外当事人案件61件，涉外案件共涉及93个国家和地区；其中涉“一带一路”案件共计136件，涵盖36个“一带一路”国家和地区。2021年深国仲共受理涉外案件345宗，所涉国家和地区25个，其中不乏双方当事人均为境外主体的案件。截至去年底仲裁、调解服务累计覆盖136个国家和地区。在上海国仲，虽然疫情限制了跨境流通，其去年新受理案件的当事人仍涉及28个国家和地区，包括14个“一带一路”国家和7个RCEP国家，此外仲裁规则与法律适用、境外仲裁员参与等方面也处处体现出国际化元素。
仲裁专业化
优质的仲裁服务需要深耕行业、立足行业需求，提供有针对性的专业服务，过去一年，中国仲裁的专业化程度也经历了快速提升。
去年10月15日，证监会和司法部共同颁布《关于依法开展证券期货行业仲裁试点的意见》，支持在北京、上海和深圳开展试点，在仲裁委员会内部设立证券期货仲裁中心，专门处理资本市场证券期货纠纷。作为仲裁专业化发展的重点趋势之一，贸仲和深国仲在该领域都做出了突破。
2021年5月，贸仲率先成立了贸仲上海证券期货金融国际仲裁中心，服务于建设上海国际金融中心的国家战略，“营造良好的资本市场环境，推动金融业更高水平对外开放，提升证券期货等金融纠纷争议解决的专业性，发挥仲裁等在证券期货等金融纠纷解决中的作用，支持上海打造法治化、国际化、便利化的营商环境”，王承杰秘书长如此总结中心设立的目的。
“深沪交易所的交易额连续多年位居全球前三，投资者权益保护需求随之凸显……仲裁有专业性强、灵活性高等特点，有利于解决资本市场纠纷中长期存在的问题。”
— 刘晓春，深国仲
6月，深国仲与深圳证券交易所协同创新、合作共建中国（深圳）证券仲裁中心，该中心于11月1日正式运作，是《试点意见》出台后成立的全国首家证券仲裁中心。刘晓春院长告诉ALB，证券仲裁中心是全球首个由国际仲裁机构与证券交易所共建的行业仲裁平台，亦是资本市场争议解决中国模式的重要探索。“深沪交易所的交易额连续多年位居全球前三，投资者权益保护需求随之凸显……仲裁有专业性强、灵活性高、一裁终局、去地方保护等特点，有利于解决资本市场纠纷中长期存在的成本高、效率低、可预期性不强、专业度参差不齐、中小投资者保护门槛高和地方保护主义等问题”。
实际上，王承杰秘书长指出，在内设专业中心之前，仲裁机构已经感受到了金融仲裁的快速发展。以贸仲为例，其2021年受理金融类案件1008件，涉案标的约522亿元。王秘书长告诉ALB，贸仲受理的金融争议具备一些典型特征，如争议金额高、体量大、大案要案频现；涉及行业、主体多样，涵盖金融机构、中介机构和广大投资者；案件争议涉及的广度、深度、难度不断提升，金融交易架构复杂，适用法律类别众多，并受制于纷繁交错的监管制度体系，牵涉的法律问题多重；由于金融产品的高度复制性和普遍采用性，个案的裁判结果也势必产生规模效应和引导效应，对市场往往影响重大。
正因如此，贸仲一向注重金融仲裁服务的质量，早在2003年就已制定了专门的金融仲裁规则（即《贸仲金融争议仲裁规则》），且聘任大量擅长证券期货等金融争议解决的仲裁员，具有金融背景的在册中外仲裁员数量共计560人。未来贸仲将借助新设于上海的中心及自身积累的金融仲裁优势，不断优化专业服务，宣传金融仲裁的重要性，并吸引更多当事人使用该服务。王承杰秘书长告诉ALB，贸仲将内外“两手抓”：对内关注“提升内功”，如进一步制定和完善金融仲裁机制和有关规则，并在贸仲总会设立证券期货仲裁中心，发挥贸仲品牌优势，服务金融行业发展。对外加强合作，如与法院建立沟通和长效协作机制；建立和加强与资本市场监管机构、自律组织之间的合作，完善证券期货纠纷仲裁与调解、诉讼的有效衔接；举办金融仲裁方面的讲座、研讨会和培训，加强对贸仲金融仲裁服务的宣传，增加并深化法律工作者对金融仲裁的了解，提高仲裁员和案件经办人处理金融纠纷的专业水平；与行业协会共同研究热点难点法律问题，服务行业发展，编写独立、公平、公正、妥善处理金融类案件的案例选编，引导行业健康稳定发展。
自我提升也是深国仲推动证券期货仲裁发展的重要举措。刘晓春院长指出，“深国仲自2022年2月21日启用新一届仲裁员名册，其中资本市场领域仲裁员461名，主要来自证券监管机构、行业自律组织、资本市场主体、高校研究院等，涵盖多个业务领域”。因此，证券仲裁中心的建设，不仅包括建设一流的证券期货专业仲裁员队伍，也包括研究制定符合证券期货行业特点的仲裁规则，通过符合行业需求的创新条款助力解决纠纷。
证券期货仲裁外，另一个值得注意的仲裁专业化发展方向则为促进数字经济发展的数据仲裁，在此领域上海国仲的实践颇为亮眼。
去年11月，上海国际经济贸易仲裁委员会数据仲裁中心伴随上海数据交易所同时成立，“此前，上海国仲已受理了多起涉及数字贸易、数据交易的仲裁案件，包括跨境电商、虚拟货币、金融科技、网络直播平台等纠纷。”王唯骏秘书长分享道，“未来数据仲裁中心将承载服务数据合规、评估以及交易全周期的争议解决功能，在跨境数字贸易规则制定、数字化仲裁等方面与上海数据交易所开展交流合作。”
深化改革
回应社会经济发展需求无疑是仲裁机构的发展要义，在提升专业能力以外，过去一年，中国内地仲裁机构也不断通过改革完善商事仲裁法律制度，并提高国际公信力和影响力。
“过去一段时间，上海国仲开展了很多创新案件管理和仲裁规则尝试，以满足商事主体对公正、专业、高效、便捷的商事仲裁服务的需求。”
— 王唯骏，上海国仲
“过去一段时间，上海国仲开展了很多创新案件管理和仲裁规则尝试，以满足商事主体对公正、专业、高效、便捷的商事仲裁服务的需求。”王唯骏秘书长如此告诉ALB。
例如在案件管理方面，面对疫情冲击，上海国仲自2020年起尝试在线开庭，已经成功进行了百余场线上开庭、调解、听证等，并在去年7月开通了“一站式”国际商事纠纷多元化解决线上平台，便于当事人在线提交立案材料；去年10月，上海国仲参与建立了诉调仲对接机制，对于先行调解成功后当事人申请仲裁确认调解协议的，予以减免部分仲裁费用。
在仲裁规则方面，上海国仲的工作则包括修订仲裁规则，尤其是打通原有的上海国仲仲裁规则与自贸区仲裁规则；发挥数据仲裁、航空仲裁、中非联合仲裁、金砖国家仲裁机制的作用；明确信息技术的使用并配套制定在线庭审指引；结合《仲裁法》意见稿推进临时仲裁协助服务指引的制定工作等。
作为2021年全球最受欢迎的五大仲裁机构之一，贸仲在服务和制度方面也有一系列新动向，以更贴近国际最佳实践。王承杰秘书长向ALB介绍了贸仲近年采取的四方面主要措施：一是提高办案质效的措施，包括制定《进一步提高仲裁效率暂行办法》、优化业务流程、完善裁决核阅制度等。二是提升信息化水平的措施，主要包括构建智慧庭审平台以实现在线开庭；启用电子证据交换平台，满足远程提交证据材料和审理案件需求；实现办公流程电子化，完善现代化“云上”仲裁服务。在过去一年，贸仲网上立案870件，占比达21.37%。三是应对新冠肺炎疫情采取的措施，例如发布《关于新冠肺炎疫情期间积极稳妥推进仲裁程序指引（试行）》。四是构建更加合理的仲裁员队伍。去年贸仲更新了仲裁员名册，首次实现中国内地各省区市全覆盖；港澳台及外籍仲裁员有483名，分别来自85个国家和地区，其中‘一带一路’沿线国家增至47个，仲裁员分布地域、专业领域、队伍结构更加合理。
值得注意的是，在进一步服务“一带一路“建设，做好涉外和涉港澳台仲裁服务方面，贸仲也采取了一系列重要举措。继2019年发起《“一带一路”仲裁机构北京联合宣言》后，贸仲于2021年联合32家境外仲裁机构和15家国内仲裁机构发布《“一带一路”仲裁机构北京联合宣言合作机制》，落地具体举措，机制化开展“一带一路”法治合作。贸仲2021年还与西班牙马德里国际仲裁中心、孟加拉国际仲裁中心和意大利仲裁协会分别签署《合作协议》，未来将在互用开庭设施、互荐仲裁员、共同举办国际仲裁研讨会、展开仲裁培训等方面深入合作。在涉港澳台仲裁服务上，为方便当事人依据2019年中国内地和中国香港签署的《关于内地与香港特别行政区法院就仲裁程序互相协助保全的安排》申请保全，促进粤港澳大湾区争议解决机制发展，贸仲香港于2021年发布《贸仲香港仲裁案件适用内地与香港实务指引》。
总结近年来一系列改革措施，深国仲刘晓春院长提出了“法定化，专业化，国际化”几个特点。在法定化方面，深国仲推动深圳市人大通过《深圳国际仲裁院条例》，以立法方式进一步保障仲裁机构的独立性和公信力；在专业化方面，除金融与资本市场外，深国仲也关注于高科技与知识产权、海事海商与物流行业，并设立了聚焦上述行业的三大专业中心；在国际化方面，伴随2021年底国际仲裁大厦在深圳前海的启用，深国仲开始积极引进相关国际组织和世界知名仲裁机构进驻前海，并于今年更新了新一届仲裁员名单，新一届仲裁员名册中境外仲裁员共计有567名，占比36.67%，覆盖114个国家和地区。
与此同时，作为粤港澳大湾区成立的第一家仲裁机构，深国仲在港澳与内地法律合作上向来扮演着重要角色，其在过去一年也继续探索着内港澳合作改革创新。刘晓春院长告诉ALB，通过在香港设立华南（香港）国际仲裁院（SCIAHK），深国仲形成了“深圳+香港”“双城两院”格局，过去一年有多宗涉外案件采用联动方式审理，即内地当事人、仲裁员到深国仲，在港当事人、仲裁员到SCIAHK，“两院”之间采用视频连线方式“线上+线下”同步开庭，极大优化了跨境当事人的参与体验感。
此外，2021年深国仲还邀请到3家香港、4家澳门法律机构入驻在深圳河套深港科技创新合作区设立的“粤港澳大湾区国际仲裁中心交流合作平台”，进一步促进了内港澳三地机构联动；并通过扩大“粤港澳仲裁调解联盟”成员数量、推出联盟联合调解员名册等方式，继续探索推动“一国两制三法域”规则衔接与制度对接。
《仲裁法》修订将带来影响
近期仲裁领域不可忽视的另一大热点，则是《仲裁法》时隔26年后启动修订，考虑到时间跨度下仲裁理论及实务的巨大变化，新《仲裁法》必将具备诸多新意，产生重大影响。
“本次《仲裁法》修改对增强我国仲裁的公信力、竞争力、国际影响力，进一步优化社会发展环境、服务国家重大发展战略、推进全球经济治理等方面具有重大意义。”
— 王承杰，贸仲
“本次《仲裁法》修改对中国纠纷解决机制的进步影响重大。”王承杰秘书长指出，“对增强我国仲裁的公信力、竞争力、国际影响力，进一步优化社会发展环境、服务国家重大发展战略、推进全球经济治理等方面具有重大意义。”
王承杰秘书长告诉ALB，作为新中国仲裁事业的始发机构，贸仲在《仲裁法》1994年首次制定时就为其提供了重要参考和依据。这一次仲裁法修改，贸仲亦多次组织内外部研讨，广泛收集意见，在前期司法部四次征求意见过程中共提交130余条修改意见及建议，得到了重视和采纳。例如，本次《仲裁法》修订新增的紧急仲裁员制度与贸仲基于自身实践所提建议有很大关系。贸仲不仅早就专门制定了《贸仲紧急仲裁员程序》，而且具有推进该程序的重要实践。就在去年，贸仲总部受理的一起涉外案件就启动了紧急仲裁员程序，紧急仲裁员自接受指定之日起15日内就已作出决定并发送双方当事人，该决定得到了双方当事人的尊重和执行，也为后续仲裁程序的有效进行提供了保障。这些实践为本次《仲裁法》的修订提供了重要参考。
此外，开放仲裁员名册、赋予仲裁庭临时措施决定权、扩大仲裁机构受理案件的类型范围、认可仲裁庭的自裁管辖权、为仲裁机构线上工作方式提供法律依据等规定，都将带来具体影响。“仲裁机构需要对其仲裁规则进行相应更新并调整日常工作，以适应立法新变化。”王承杰秘书长提醒道。
上海国仲的王唯骏秘书长对此表示认同。“新制度的演进对仲裁机构案件管理的理念转变及能力提升都将带来新挑战。”她说。新《仲裁法》将更贴合国际实践，但也必须考虑中国实际，“以上海国仲为代表的一些国际化程度较高的仲裁机构很早就开始了思考和探索，即如何在中国的法律语境下有效融入国际仲裁的制度理念。”
她举了仲裁庭做出临时措施决定的例子。在1992年一宗双方都是境外主体的房地产开发合同中，上海国仲要求双方在仲裁期间不得损害对方商誉，这即是一项“有中国特色的仲裁临时措施”。2014年上海国仲在《自贸区仲裁规则》中首次在内地引入临时措施制度和紧急仲裁员制度，也得到国内多家仲裁机构的借鉴，王唯骏秘书长建议道，未来该制度“可以侧重于保护当事人的商誉、商业秘密，对特定标的物的及时处置等行为保全措施，侧重于证据披露、证据开示等证据保全措施，以区别于法院的财产保全制度，体现商事仲裁特点”。
作为《仲裁法》制定及修订过程中的重要参与者，贸仲也对修订草案现稿提出了自己的思考，王承杰秘书长指出，《仲裁法》的修改仍应首先建立在维护仲裁本质属性的前提和基础上，维护仲裁的权威性和生命力；同时需要处理好五大关系，即学习国际先进做法与立足中国本土国情的关系，仲裁法必然要与国际先进理念和通行做法接轨，与此同时也必须植根于中国的本土国情，考虑中国的现实情况，发扬中国的智慧与经验；仲裁法与仲裁规则的关系，前者应审慎把握刚性条款的范围，对仲裁程序的规定宜原则而不宜过细；机构仲裁与临时仲裁的关系，应强调以机构仲裁为主的原则，并适当明确仲裁机构的管理职责；司法与仲裁的关系，司法对仲裁的审查应当是明确、具体、规范、适度的；当事人自主权与机构管理的权责关系，机构在案件管理中充分发挥成熟先进经验，例如实行仲裁员名册制并允许当事人在名册外选择仲裁员，且该仲裁员应经机构予以确认。
下一步计划
2022年，以《仲裁法》修改为代表，王承杰秘书长指出中国仲裁领域有许多热点值得关注。在此背景下，“仲裁机构既需要‘守正’，即坚持仲裁根本原则和先进做法，又需要‘创新’，即围绕国家发展的战略规划以及仲裁领域的热点创新体制机制以及日常工作”。
据此，今年贸仲的工作将围绕四方面展开，一是通过推动改革、完善规则、优化仲裁员队伍、提升服务质效等，夯实事业发展基础；二是更好服务构建新发展格局，聚力打造仲裁服务新高地，包括统筹国内国际仲裁市场发展，针对贸易投资、金融、建筑、碳交易、知识产权、数字经济等重点行业领域不断扩大服务范围，深耕证券期货等重点行业市场，积极布局新业务增长点；三是强化国际交流合作，助力法治中国形象建设；四则是全面强化监督管理和风险防控，铸就仲裁公信力。
在上海国仲，下阶段该机构将持续关注《仲裁法》修订进程和仲裁机构体制机制改革，同时关注RCEP协定带来的仲裁机构“走出去”的服务延申，在知识产权、数字贸易、金融、电信等跨境交易下更好地发挥商事仲裁法律制度的作用。王唯骏秘书长指出，借助科技赋能、完成仲裁规则修订、契合新兴领域争议解决需求，也都是上海国仲不断提升专业性、国际性的手段。
在深国仲，刘晓春院长告诉ALB：“当前国际形势空前复杂，这为跨境争议领域带来诸多不便及不确定性因素。仲裁机构更应充分发挥仲裁跨境管辖、跨境执行的优势。为此，2022年，深国仲一方面将为国际投资纠纷，即投资者与东道国政府间的投资争议解决做好准备；另一方面将持续深化粤港澳仲裁合作，在仲裁实践中推动落实粤港澳各项司法协助制度，为境内外当事人提供优质、高效、便捷的争议解决服务”。
ONWARDS AND UPWARDS
Over the past year, Chinese arbitration institutions have continued their journey towards becoming world-class through the twin strategies of specialisation and internationalisation. The heads of leading arbitration centers say that while they are proud of their reform and innovation so far, they still aim for even more user-friendliness and sophistication.
In 2021, Chinese arbitration institutions handled over 415,000 cases, involving a total amount of over 850 billion yuan ($126 billion) and achieving a record high. That year, the total number of arbitration institutions in China also exceeded 270, and China has become one of leading countries to use arbitration to resolve civil and commercial disputes.
Talking about the changes in the cases handled by arbitration institutions in the past year, heads of the interviewed institutions mentioned the increase of case volume and the amount of the subject matter, new case types, and the improved internationalisation of the cases.
For example, the China International Economic and Trade Arbitration Commission (CIETAC) accepted 4,071 cases in 2021, seeing a year-on-year increase of 12.61 percent. The disputed amount has exceeded 100 billion yuan for four consecutive years, of which the average amount of foreign-related cases was as high as 90 million yuan. There were 182 cases involving a disputed amount of more than 100 million yuan.
In 2021, Shenzhen Court of International Arbitration (SCIA) handled 7,036 arbitration cases, with the disputed amount topped 85.6 billion yuan, a year-on-year increase of 38.93 percent. Meanwhile, the Shanghai International Arbitration Centre (SHIAC) case volume, the amount in dispute and the average amount in dispute also reached new highs, with the average amount in dispute exceeding 23 million yuan.
In last year, the cases accepted by CIETAC features diversified case types and the notable growth of cases in emerging fields. Wang Chengjie, Vice Chairman and Secretary General of CIETAC, points out that last year CIETAC accepted a total of 21 types of disputes, with “financial innovation cases increased by more than 50 percent, construction engineering cases increased by 36 percent, franchising, cultural and entertainment industries and other types of disputes were more than doubled. Disputes over intellectual property, energy resources, sino-foreign joint ventures, housing, land and real estate, and entrustment contracts also increased”.
Liu Xiaochun, president of SCIA, says that in 2021, the main types of cases were financial cases, international and domestic trade cases, as well as real estate, infrastructure and construction engineering cases. Among them, securities cases accounted for 19 percent, and the amount in dispute exceeded 40 billion yuan.
The increased degree of internationalization is another feature of arbitration cases. In 2021, CIETAC accepted 636 foreign-related cases last year, 61 of which were disputes between foreign parties. The foreign-related cases involved a total of 93 countries and regions. Among them, there were 136 Belt and Road-related cases, covering 36 “Belt and Road” countries and regions. SCIA handled a total of 345 foreign-related cases involving 25 countries and regions. As of the end of 2021, its arbitration and mediation services have covered 136 countries and regions. At SHIAC, although the COVID outbreak has restricted cross-border activities, the parties to its newly accepted cases last year still involved 28 countries and regions, including 14 Belt and Road countries and 7 RCEP countries.
SPECIALISATION IS KEY
High-quality arbitration services require deep industry know-how and serving the need of industry, and provide targeted specialised services. In the past year, the specialisation of arbitration in China has also experienced rapid improvement.
Last year, the China Securities Regulatory Commission (CSRC) and the Ministry of Justice (MoJ) jointly promulgated the Opinions on Carrying out the Pilot Program of Arbitration in the Securities and Futures Industry. As one of the major trends in the development of arbitration specialisation, both CIETAC and SCIA have made breakthroughs in this field.
In May 2021, CIETAC took the lead in establishing the CIETAC Shanghai International Arbitration Center for Securities/Futures and Financial Disputes. Secretary General Wang Chengjie tells the ALB that the purpose of establishing this center is “to serve the national strategy of building Shanghai into an international financial center, to create a favorable capital market environment, to promote a higher level of opening up of the financial industry, and to enhance specialisation of financial disputes resolution such as securities and futures-related disputes, giving full play to the role of arbitration in the resolution of financial disputes including securities and futures-related disputes, and supporting Shanghai to create a law-based, international and convenient business environment”.
— Liu Xiaochun, SCIA
In June, SCIA and Shenzhen Stock Exchange jointly established the China (Shenzhen) Securities Arbitration Center, which officially opened in November. "The demand for protecting investors’ rights and interests has become increasingly prominent,” says Liu. “Capital market arbitration are highly specialised, highly flexible, the arbitration award shall be final and binding, and anti-local protectionism. It is conducive to solving issues in capital market disputes that have been long overdue.”
In fact, as Wang points out, before the establishment of specialised centers, arbitration institutions had already felt the rapid development of financial arbitration. Taking CIETAC as an example, it accepted 1,008 financial cases in 2021, disputed amount involved was about 52.2 billion yuan. Wang tells the ALB that the financial disputes accepted by CIETAC have some typical characteristics, such as high amount of dispute, large volume, and frequent occurrence of major and important cases; involving various industries and subjects, including financial institutions, intermediaries and investors; the breadth, depth and difficulty involved in the disputes are increasing, financial transaction structures are complex, with numerous types of applicable laws, and are subject to numerous and intertwined regulatory systems, and multiple legal issues are involved; the arbitration results are bound to produce scale effects and guidance effects, which often have a significant impact on the market as financial products are highly replicable and widely adopted.
Because of this, CIETAC has always attached great importance to the quality of financial arbitration services. As early as 2003, it has formulated dedicated financial arbitration rules (known as CIETAC Financial Disputes Arbitration Rules), and has invited a large number of arbitrators who specialise in financial disputes such as securities and futures, and now has 560 registered Chinese and foreign arbitrators with financial background.
In the future, CIETAC will make use of the newly established center in Shanghai and its financial arbitration advantages to continuously optimize professional services, publicize the importance of financial arbitration, and attract more parties to use the service. Wang says that CIETAC will focus on both internal and external efforts: internally focus on “improving internal strength,” such as further formulating and improving the financial arbitration mechanism and related rules, and setting up a securities and futures arbitration center at the CIETAC headquarters to give full play to CIETAC’s brand advantages and serve the development of the financial industry.
CIETAC will also strengthen its external cooperation, such as establishing a communication and long-term cooperation mechanism with the courts; establishing and strengthening cooperation with capital market regulators and self-regulatory organizations, improving the effective coordination between arbitration, mediation, and litigation of securities and futures disputes; hosting lectures, seminars and trainings on financial arbitration, strengthen the publicity of CIETAC financial arbitration services, improve and deepen the understanding of financial arbitration among legal professionals, and improve the professionalism of arbitrators and case managers in handling financial disputes; jointly conducting researches on hot and difficult legal issues with industry associations, serve the development of the industry; compile a selection of financial cases which has been addressed independently, fairly, impartially and properly, and guide the healthy and stable development of the industry.
Self-improvement is also an important measure of SCIA to promote the development of securities and futures arbitration. Liu points out that this includes building a first-class professional team of securities and futures arbitrators, “SCIA rolled out a new roster of arbitrators from Feb. 21, including 461 arbitrators in the capital market field, covering a variety of business fields.” It also conducts research and formulation of arbitration rules that meet the characteristics of the securities and futures industry, and help resolve disputes through innovative clauses that meet the needs of the industry.
DEEPER REFORMS
In addition to improving professional capabilities, over the past year, arbitration institutions in mainland China have also continued to reform and improve the legal system of commercial arbitration, and enhancing their international credibility and influence.
— Wang Weijun, SHIAC
"Recently, SHIAC has made many attempts to innovate case management and arbitration rules," says Wang Weijun, secretary general of the SHIAC. For example, in terms of case management, SHIAC has tried to hold online hearings since 2020. In October last year, SHIAC participated in the establishment of a litigation, mediation, and arbitration coordination mechanism. If the parties apply for arbitration to confirm the mediation agreement after successful mediation, part of the arbitration fee will be reduced or exempted.
As one of the five most popular arbitration institutions globally in 2021, CIETAC also made a series of new movements in terms of services and systems to benchmark against international best practices. Wang Chengjie introduces four main measures taken by CIETAC in recent years: First, measures to improve the quality and efficiency of case management, including formulating the Interim Measures for Further Improving Arbitration Efficiency, optimizing management processes, and improving the arbitration award scrutiny system, etc. The second is measures to improve the level of informatization, mainly including building a smart trial platform to carry out online hearing; launching an electronic evidence exchange platform to meet the needs of remote submission of evidence materials and hearing cases; enabling the electronic office process and improving the modernized cloud-based arbitration service. In the past year, CIETAC has registered 870 cases online, accounting for 21.37 percent of the total cases.
The third is the measures taken in response to the COVID-19, such as issuing the “Guidelines on Proceeding with Arbitration Actively and Properly during the COVID-19 Pandemic (Trial).” Fourth, build a more balanced team of arbitrators. Last year, CIETAC updated its Panel of Arbitrators, and for the first time achieved full coverage of all provinces, autonomous regions and municipalities in mainland China; there are 483 arbitrators from Hong Kong, Macao, Taiwan and 85 foreign countries and regions, of which the number of “Belt and Road” countries increased to 47. The geographical distribution, professional fields and team structure of the arbitrators become more reasonable.
It is worth noting that CIETAC has also taken a series of important measures to further serve the development of the “Belt and Road” Initiative and to provide high-quality arbitration services related to foreign countries/regions and Hong Kong, Macao and Taiwan. Following the launch of the “Beijing Joint Declaration of the Belt and Road Arbitration Institutions” in 2019, CIETAC jointly issued the “Cooperation Mechanism of the Beijing Joint Declaration of Belt and Road Arbitration Institutions” with 32 overseas arbitration institutions and 15 domestic arbitration institutions in 2021, to implement specific measures and carry out legal cooperation for the "Belt and Road" Initiative in an institutionalized way.
In 2021, CIETAC also signed cooperation agreements with the Madrid International Arbitration Center of Spain, the Bangladesh International Arbitration Centre and the Italian Association for Arbitration respectively. In the future, in-depth cooperation will be conducted in such aspects as mutual use of hearing facilities, mutual recommendation of arbitrators, joint organization of international arbitration seminars and arbitration training. For arbitration services related to Hong Kong, Macao and Taiwan, in order to facilitate parties to apply for preservation orders in accordance with the "Arrangement Concerning Mutual Assistance in Court-ordered Interim Measures in Aid of Arbitral Proceedings by the Courts of the Mainland and of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region" signed by mainland China and Hong Kong in 2019, and to promote the dispute resolution mechanism in the Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Greater Bay Area (GBA), CIETAC Hong Kong issued the “Practical Guidelines for the Application of the Mainland and Hong Kong ‘Preservation Arrangements’ in Cases Accepted by CIETAC Hong Kong Arbitration Center” in 2021.
Summarizing a series of reform measures in recent years, Liu of SCIA says the efforts are mainly focused on major areas of "legalization, specialisation, and internationalization.” As an arbitration institution located in the GBA, SCIA has always played an important role in the legal cooperation within the region. It has also continued to explore the reform and innovation of cooperation in the past year. Liu says that through the establishment of the South China (Hong Kong) International Court of Arbitration (SCIAHK) in Hong Kong SAR, a number of foreign-related cases have been tried in a coordinated manner in the past year, that is, mainland parties and arbitrators attended hearing at SCIA, and parties and arbitrators in Hong Kong attended hearing at SCIAHK, the two parties held the court session synchronously by video, which greatly optimized the participation experience of cross-border parties.
REVISED ARBITRATION LAW
Another major development in the field of arbitration has been the revision of the Arbitration Law after a period of 26 years. Considering the great changes in arbitration theory and practice in the time span, the new Arbitration Law will certainly incorporate many new ideas, resulting in tremendous influence.
— Wang Chengjie, CIETAC
"The revision of the Arbitration Law has a significant impact on the progress of China's dispute resolution mechanism", says Wang Chengjie. He also points out that " it is of great significance to enhance the credibility, competitiveness and international influence of China's arbitration, further optimize the social development environment, serve the country's major development strategies, and promote global economic governance."
Wang Chengjie says that, as the originator of arbitration cause in China, CIETAC provided an important reference and basis for the Arbitration Law when it was first formulated in 1994. In this revision of the Arbitration Law, CIETAC has also organized many internal and external seminars and extensively collected opinions. During the previous four consultations of the Ministry of Justice, CIETAC submitted a total of more than 130 revision opinions and suggestions, which were taken seriously and adopted. For example, the emergency arbitrator system newly added in this revision has a lot to do with CIETAC’s recommendations based on its own practice. CIETAC has not only formulated the "CIETAC Emergency Arbitrator Proceedings" early on, but also has important practice experience in promoting the Proceedings. In last year, a foreign-related case accepted by CIETAC headquarters triggered the emergency arbitrator procedure. The emergency arbitrator has made a decision and sent it to both parties within 15 days from the date of accepting the appointment. The decision has been respected and implemented by both parties, which also provides assurance for the effective conduct of subsequent arbitration proceedings. These practices provide important references for the revision of the Arbitration Law.
Furthermore, provisions such as allowing parties to appoint arbitrators who are not in the arbitrator rosters, empowering arbitral tribunals to make decision on interim measures, expanding the scope of the types of cases accepted by arbitration institutions, the recognition of the arbitral tribunal's competence-competence, providing legal basis for the online hearing of arbitration institutions will all have specific implications. "Arbitration institutions need to update their arbitration rules accordingly and adjust their daily work to accommodate the new changes in legislation", says Wang Chengjie.
Wang Weijun of SHIAC agrees. “The new Arbitration Law will be more in line with international practice, but it must also take into account China’s actual situation,” he says. “Some highly internationalized arbitration institutions represented by the SHIAC have long begun to think and explore these areas, that is, how to effectively integrate the institutional concept of international arbitration in the Chinese legal context."
As an important participant in the formulation and revision of the Arbitration Law, CIETAC also put forward its own reflections on the current draft revision. Wang Chengjie points out that the revision of the Arbitration Law should still be based on the premise and foundation of maintaining the essential nature of arbitration, and maintaining the authority and vitality of arbitration; at the same time, five major relationships must be properly handled. First, the relationship between learning from advanced international practices and being based on China’s local conditions. Arbitration law must be in line with international advanced ideas and common practices. At the same time, it must be rooted in China's local conditions, consider China's actual situation, and promote China's wisdom and experience. Second, the relationship between arbitration law and arbitration rules - the former should carefully grasp the scope of rigid clauses, and the provisions of arbitration procedures therein should be principle-based rather than too detailed. Third, the relationship between institutional arbitration and ad hoc arbitration - the principle of focusing on institutional arbitration should be emphasized, and the management responsibilities of the arbitration institution should be clearly defined. Fourth, the relationship between the judiciary and arbitration - the judicial review of arbitration should be clear, specific, standardized and appropriate; and the relationship between parties' autonomy and institutional management - the institution gives full play to its mature and advanced experience in case management, such as implementing a roster system of arbitrators and allowing parties to choose arbitrators from outside the roster, and the arbitrator should be confirmed by the institution.
NEXT STEPS
In 2022, represented by the revision of the Arbitration Law, Wang Chengjie points out that there are many hotspots in the field of arbitration in China worthy of attention. In this context, “arbitration institutions need not only 'maintaining righteousness,’ that is, adhering to the fundamental principles and advanced practices of arbitration, but also 'pursue innovation,’ that is, carry out innovations in institutions, mechanisms and daily work based on the strategic planning of national development and hotspots in the field of arbitration.
Accordingly, the work of CIETAC this year will focus on four aspects. First, it will consolidate the foundation for business development by promoting reform, improving rules, optimizing the team of arbitrators, and improving service quality and efficiency. Second, it will better serve new development landscape, and take arbitration services to a new height, including coordinating the development of domestic and international arbitration markets, and expanding the scope of services for key industries such as trade and investment, finance, construction, carbon trading, intellectual property, and digital economy. It will also deepen its presence in key industry markets such as securities and futures, and actively explore new growth points in emerging business areas. Third, it will strengthen international exchanges and cooperation to help build the image of rule of law in China. Finally, it will comprehensively strengthen supervision and management, as well as risk prevention and control to build credibility of arbitration.
Meanwhile SHIAC closely track the progress of the Arbitration Law revision and the reform of the system and mechanism of arbitration institutions, and paying attention to the extension of services for arbitration institutions to “go global” brought about by the RCEP Agreement. Wang Weijun also points out that the importance of technology empowerment and completion of arbitration rules revision.
At SCIA, Liu says that "the current international situation is unprecedentedly complex, which brings a lot of inconvenience and uncertainty to the field of cross-border disputes. Arbitration institutions should give full play to the advantages of cross-border jurisdiction and cross-border enforcement of arbitration, to provides high-quality, efficient and convenient dispute resolution services for domestic and foreign parties."