英国法院支持中国CIETAC仲裁裁决的执行（尽管案件存在信用证欺诈例外问题）

更新时间：2018-04-12 11:24:20  张振安 临时仲裁ADA 编辑：lianluobu  点击次数：1945次

英国法院支持中国CIETAC仲裁裁决的执行

（尽管案件存在信用证欺诈例外问题）

2017年2月17日，英国商事法庭做出裁定执行CIETAC的仲裁裁决，本案件的当事人为Sinocore v RBRG。

案件事实

本案件涉及国际货物销售合同争议，买方RBRG拒绝根据信用证支付卖方Sinocore货款，理由是Sinocore提交的议付单据提单存在欺诈，提单上的装运时间与实际装船时间不符。

买方RBRG修改了信用证装运时间，卖方Sinocore也递交了真实装运日期的提单。但是买方RBRG还是终止合同，并在CIETAC进行仲裁，仲裁裁决支持了Sinocore。

法院认定

“Sinocore had not agreed to the revised shipment date, RBRG was in breach of the Sale Contract in procuring that Rabobank amended the Letter of Credit so that it was inconsistent with the terms of the Sale Contract in that regard. It was this breach of contract, the Tribunal found, which resulted in Sinocore not receiving payment and caused the termination of the Sale Contract and losses to be incurred.”【8(2)】

执行仲裁裁决是否违反公共利益

RBRG基于下述仲裁法103(3)条规定，认为执行裁决违反公共利益:

"Recognition or enforcement of the award may also be refused if the award is in respect of a matter which is not capable of settlement by arbitration, or if it would be contrary to public policy to recognise or enforce the award.”

RBRG同时认为执行该裁决将 “assist a seller who presented forged documents under a letter of credit”（支持信用证项下提供虚假单据），并主张信用证支付地欺诈例外原则等。

 法院认定

欺诈例外是信用证银行严格付款（单单一致和单证一致）义务的例外，其适用并不影响提供虚假单据的该方获得通常救济。

the fraud exception refers to the bank’s strict duty to pay under a letter of credit. The scope of its applicability, however, does not prevent a party who presents fraudulent documents from obtaining relief more generally.【46段】

法院认为：不适于审查案件实体问题和适用中国法的有关问题。

it inappropriate to scrutinise the tribunal’s analysis of the facts or the way it applied Chinese law.[44段] 、

并认为：国际仲裁裁决的终局性时意义重大的公共利益，在本案中，仲裁裁决“显而易见”超过了欺诈问题。

“there is a significant public interest in the finality of international arbitration awards, which in this case, “clearly and distinctly” outweighs the issue of fraud.[47段]