阿联酋通过新的联邦仲裁法

更新时间：2018-06-07 11:20:36  张振安 临时仲裁ADA 编辑：lianluobu  点击次数：1605次

2018年5月3日，阿拉伯联合酋长国总统HH Sheikh Khalifa bin Zayed Al Nahyan发布了备受该国期待的［2018］第6号新《联邦仲裁法》（“新法”）。根据《国际商事仲裁示范法》制订的新法将替代《民事诉讼法》（联邦法1992年第11号（修正案））第203条至第218条规定，旧法仅适用于阿联酋国内仲裁（“民事诉讼法”）。新法适用于阿联酋进行的任何仲裁，除非当事人已共同约定适用另一法律，（第2条）并将该法适用于正在进行的仲裁程序，即便仲裁协议在新法生效之前达成（第59条）。

新法将在官方公报公布后一个月生效。本文将着重介绍一些至关重要的发展，并明确新法与其制订的基础联合国贸易法委员会《示范法》的关键相似点和差异点。

重要变化

仲裁协议

新法确认了仲裁协议必须是书面形式的现行要求。但是，与《示范法》一致，其第7条明确规定，仲裁协议可以通过包括如电子邮件等现代电子信息的交流方式订立。第5条还规定了仲裁协议可以于争议发生之前或之后在单独的文件中或以引用并入的方式达成。

根据第4条第（1）款，为了使仲裁协议有效，仲裁协议必须由有能力行使权利的自然人或被明确授权代表公司进行仲裁的代表达成。尽管从第53（c）条来看，约束代理人权利能力的法律将是可适用于该特定公司的法律，但这并未予以明确。因此，建议那些要达成受新法约束之仲裁协议的公司签署一份授权签署者订立仲裁协议的委托书。

新法第6条现确认了仲裁协议具有可分割性，并且将其视为独立于合同其他条款的协议，而不论双方之间的主合同是否无效、违约或被终止。

管辖权

新法第19条赋予了仲裁庭有权就其自身的管辖权作出裁定的权力，从而承认自裁管辖权（kompetenz-kompetenz）的原则。一方有权向法院就仲裁庭关于管辖权的初步裁决提出异议，尽管该上诉必须在仲裁庭作出裁决的15天内提起。

根据新法第20条，有意主张仲裁庭无管辖权的一方当事人必须在不迟于答辩状的截止日期前作出。如果一方希望提出请求已超出了仲裁协议管辖的事项范围时，其必须答辩时提出。第20条允许仲裁庭放弃异议期限，前提是存在合理的延期理由。

临时措施/救济

较受欢迎的发展是，新法明确仲裁庭有权采取临时措施或保全措施，并签发临时或部分裁决。

新法第21条规定了仲裁庭可签发的临时命令的非详尽清单，与《示范法》的规定一致，并包括了对据以执行随后作出的裁决中的资产和资金的保全措施，维持现状以待对争议作出裁决的措施，以及对与争议解决相关的或对争议解决重要的证据进行保全的裁定。被签发临时措施的当事人可根据第21条请求法院裁令执行同样的措施。

与《示范法》不同，新法没有规定请求方在仲裁庭批准临时措施之前任何需满足的先决条件。然而，第21条第（2）款确实规定了请求临时措施的当事人可能需要提供足以包括所有这些措施之费用的担保，并且如果仲裁庭随后裁决该方无权获得救济，其可能要承担执行这些措施产生的损害赔偿。

此外，新法第18条授予了法院在其认为必要时签发临时或保全措施令的管辖权，以支持当前或可能进行的仲裁程序。

管理效率与程序

第11条至第17条规定了仲裁庭的任命程序以及仲裁员回避的异议，这与《示范法》的规定相同；

此外，与《示范法》一致，该法第28条规定了当事人可以自由约定仲裁地，仲裁庭可以在任何其认为合适的地点召开会议和进行庭审，包括在阿联酋境外的地点，以及通过电子方式进行。此外，新法第41条第（6）款明确规定，将仲裁地视为仲裁裁决的签署地，包括以副本和电子形式完成的签署，而无论实际签署的地点在哪里。这对于以前要求仲裁员到阿联酋签署，这样国内裁决才有效，是项受欢迎的发展。

与《民事诉讼法》中的立场一样，如双方未就签发最终裁决的时限达成协议，新法规定签发裁决的期限应为第一次庭审的日期起的六个月内。然而，新法第42条授予了仲裁庭最长延期六个月的权力，除非双方同意延长更长的期限。任何进一步的延期均必须经仲裁庭或当事人请求法院作出裁定。应当指出的是，未能在规定的时间内签发裁决是第53（1）条规定的撤销裁决的理由之一。

根据新法第46条规定，尽管法律没有关于当事人费用的裁决规定，但仲裁庭有权裁决仲裁费用。

第48条确认了除非当事人另有书面约定，仲裁裁决应为保密的。

执行与撤销仲裁裁决

根据新的法律，在阿联酋执行仲裁裁决的程序已很大程度地简化了，并提高了外国仲裁裁决在阿联酋予以执行的便利性和可执行性，并强化了新法与《纽约公约》的一致性。

第52条规定，根据新法作出的仲裁裁决对当事人的约束力与法院的判决相同。该裁决可直接在阿联酋联邦或地方上诉法院（而不是先通过一审法院）被强制执行，并且根据第53条规定法院必须在收到执行请求的60日内作出强制执行的裁定。

第53条中规定的不予执行仲裁裁决的事由，类似于《示范法》规定。尽管这些理由似乎重申了《民事诉讼法典》第216条中更详细的立场、范围，并反映出了《纽约公约》规定的拒绝执行仲裁裁决的事由，但该规定显然忽略了基于如下事由拒绝承认裁决的情况：裁决可能尚未对当事人产生约束力，或裁决已被有管辖权国家机关在作出裁决的所在国或根据该国法律被撤销/中止执行——这是个被《纽约公约》所认可的理由。

提起撤销裁决之诉的期限为收到裁决之日起30天内。值得注意的是，根据第56条规定，提起撤销裁决并不能达到中止执行的目的，除非当事人证明存在合理理并提出申请后法院可以裁定中止执行。根据第57条规定，法院的执行裁定可在30日内提起上诉。

结论

联邦国家委员会（“FNC”）宪法、立法事务与上诉委员会主席Sheikh MohammedAbdullah Al Nuaimi认为，新法旨在支持阿联酋前所未有的经济增长，并确保在阿联酋经济体制内的安全投资环境。新法与国际标准和最佳实践保持一致性无疑将有助于建立阿联酋作为中东和北非地区国际仲裁首选地的声誉，并有助于将阿联酋打造成与新加坡、伦敦和纽约并列的全球仲裁中心地位。

这项法律总共有61条规定，这意味着，随着当事人对其适用的熟悉以及仲裁庭和法庭对其起草意图的熟悉，未来几个月无疑将会出现很大的发展。然而，新法作为一项极其重要且积极的发展这一事实也是非常清楚的。

【英文原文】

First insight – the new UAE Federal Arbitration Law and the future for UAE arbitration

By Craig Shepherd

On 3 May 2018,HH Sheikh Khalifa bin Zayed Al Nahyan, the President of the United Arab Emirates, issued Federal Law No. 6 of 2018 promulgating the country’s much anticipated new Federal Arbitration Law (the “New Law“). The New Law,which is heavily based on the UNCITRAL Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration, will replace and supersede Articles 203 to 218 of the Civil Procedures Code (Federal Law No. 11 of 1992 (as amended)) which currently govern arbitrations seated onshore in the UAE (the “Civil Procedure Code“). The New Law applies to any arbitration conducted in the UAE, unless the parties have agreed that another law should apply, (Article 2) and to ongoing arbitration proceedings, even if the arbitration agreement was concluded before the Law came into effect (Article 59).

The New Law will take affect one month after its date of publication in the Official Gazette.  This article highlights some of the most significant developments and identifies key similarities and differences between the New Law and the UNCITRAL Model Law on which it is based.

Significant developments

Arbitration Agreement

§ The New Law confirms the current requirement that an agreement to arbitrate must be in writing. However, consistent with the UNCITRAL Model Law, Article 7 expressly provides that the arbitration agreement may be made by an exchange of communications, including by modern methods of electronic messaging such as email. Article 5 also provides that the agreement to arbitrate may be entered into before or after a dispute has arisen, in a separate document, or incorporated by reference.

§ Pursuant to Article 4(1), in order to be valid, the arbitration agreement must be entered into by a natural person who has legal capacity to dispose of his rights or, on behalf of a company, by a representative with specific authority to arbitrate. Whilst it would appear from Article 53(c) that the law governing a representative’s capacity will be the law applicable to that particular company, this is by no means clear. Accordingly, we wouldcontinue to advise companies entering into arbitration agreements that are subject to the New Law, to execute a power of attorney expressly granting the signatory the authority to enter into the arbitration agreement.

§ Article 6 of the New Law now confirms that the agreement to arbitrate is severable and will be treated as an agreement independent of the other terms of the contract, irrespective of whether the main contract is voided, breached or terminated between the parties.

Jurisdiction

§ Article 19 of the New Law grants the Tribunal the authority to rule on its own jurisdiction, thereby recognising the principle of kompetenz-kompetenz. A party is entitled to challenge the Tribunal’s preliminary decision on jurisdiction before the courts, although such an appeal must be made within 15 days from the Tribunal’s decision.

§ Under Article 20 of the New Law, a party that intends to argue that the Tribunal has no jurisdiction must do so by no later than the deadline for the statement of defence. If a party wishes to raise a defence that the claims are outside the scope of the arbitration agreement, that defence must be asserted immediately in response to the claims being raised. Article 20 allows the Tribunal to waive the time limits set out provided there is reasonable justification for the delay.

Interim Measures/ Relief

§ In a welcome development, the New Law expressly recognises the authority of arbitral Tribunals to order interim or conservatory measures and to issue interim or partial awards.

§ Article 21 of the New Law sets out a non-exhaustive list of provisional orders that may be issued by the Tribunal, which mirrors the Model Law and includes measures preserving assets and funds out of which a subsequent award may be satisfied, maintaining the status quo pending determination of the dispute, and orders preserving evidence that may be relevant and material to the resolution of the dispute. A party issued with a provisional measure may request a court to order the execution of the same under Article 21.

§ Unlike the UNCITRAL Model Law, the New Law does not set out any pre-conditions for the requesting party to satisfy before a Tribunal grants interim measures. However, Article 21(2) does provide that the party requesting the interim measure may be required to provide security to cover the costs of those measures, and may bear the damages for enforcement of such measures if the Tribunal subsequently decides that the party was not entitledto the remedy.

§ In addition, Article 18 of the New Law grants the court jurisdiction to order interim or conservatory measures in support of current or potential arbitral proceedings as is considered necessary.

Administrative Efficiency and Procedure

§ Articles 11 to 17 set out the procedure for appointment of the Tribunal, and challenges thereto, along the same lines as set out in the UNCITRAL Model Law.

§ Also in accordance with the Model Law, Article 28 provides that the Parties are free to agree the place of the arbitration and that the arbitral Tribunal may convene meetings and hearings anywhere it considers appropriate, including venues outside of the UAE, and by electronic means. Moreover, Article 41(6) of the New Law expressly provides that arbitration awards will be deemed signed at their seat regardless of where the signing actually takes place, including if that signing is completed in counterpart and electronically. This is a welcome development for arbitrators who were previously required to be physically present in the UAE seat in orderfor a domestic award to be validly signed.

§ Absent an agreement between the parties on the length of time for issuing the final award, as is the position under the Civil Procedure Code, the New Law sets a time limit of six months from the date of the first hearing for the issuance of an award. However, Article 42 of the New Law grants the arbitral Tribunal the authority to extend the deadline for up to an additional six months, unless the parties agree a longer extension. Any further extension of time beyond this period must be by way of a court order at the request of the Tribunal or a party. It should be noted that failure to issue an award within the specified time frame is a ground for setting aside the award under Article 53(1).

§ Under Article 46 of the New Law, the Tribunal has the power to award costs of the arbitration, although the law is silent on the award of parties’ costs.

§ Article 48 confirms that the arbitral award will remain confidential unless both parties agree otherwise in a written agreement.

Enforcement and Challenge of the Arbitral Award

§ Under the New Law, the procedure to enforce an arbitration award in the UAE has been significantly streamlined, increasing the ease and ability with which foreign arbitration awards can be enforced in the UAE as well as reinforcing the New Law’s alignment with the New York Convention.

§ Article 52 states that an arbitral award made in accordance with the New Law has the same binding force on the parties as a court ruling. The award can be enforced directly before the UAE federal orlocal Courts of Appeal (rather having first to go through the Court of First Instance) and an enforcement order should be given by the Court within 60 daysof a request for enforcement under Article 53.

§ The grounds for challenging an award are contained in Article 53 and are similar to those found in the UNCITRAL Model Law. Whilst these grounds appear to restate the position set out in Article 216 of the Civil Procedure Code in broader detail and scope, and mirror the grounds for refusal to enforce an arbitral award as recognised by the New York Convention,there is the notable omission of the ability to refuse recognition on the basis that the award may not yet have become binding on the parties, or has been setaside/suspended by a competent authority of the country in which, or under the law of which, that award was originally made – this being a recognised ground under the New York Convention.

§ Actions to set aside the award are time-barred after 30 days from the date of notification of the award. Notably, under Article 56,challenging an award does not stay its enforcement, unless the Court orders the stay on the application of a party showing good cause. The Court’s enforcement decision may be appealed within 30 days under Article 57.

Conclusion

According to Sheikh Mohammed Abdullah Al Nuaimi, chairman of the Federal National Council’s(“FNC”) constitutional, legislative affairs and appeals committee, the New Lawis designed to support the UAE’s unprecedented economic growth and ensure asecure environment for investments within the UAE economy. The New Law’s alignment with international standards and best practice will undoubtedly assist in building on the UAE’s reputation as the preferred seat for international arbitration in the MENA region and position the UAE as a global arbitration hub alongside Singapore, London and New York.

The law runs to61 Articles and has yet to come into force. This means that there will, no doubt be many developments in coming months as parties become familiar with its operation, and as tribunals and courts become familiar with its drafting.However, the fact that the New Law is a very significant, and very positive,development is abundantly clear.