:::

詳目顯示

回上一頁
題名:商業訴訟與爭端解決制度改革之比較研究
作者:黃兆揚
作者(外文):HUANG, JAW-YANG
校院名稱:中國文化大學
系所名稱:法律學系
指導教授:何曜琛
謝銘洋
學位類別:博士
出版日期:2022
主題關鍵詞:商業法院紛爭解決事證開示商業事件即決裁判commercial courtADRdiscoverywitness statementonline court
原始連結:連回原系統網址new window
相關次數:
  • 被引用次數被引用次數:期刊(0) 博士論文(0) 專書(0) 專書論文(0)
  • 排除自我引用排除自我引用:0
  • 共同引用共同引用:0
  • 點閱點閱:0
商業訴訟與商事處理制度攸關一國法治、經濟發展與競爭力,各國一向高度重視。2021年我國商業法院新制成立,期能改善過往商業事件裁判效率不佳(延宕多年)與資源配置不當(重刑輕民)等結構面問題,積極邁向國際化。
論文第二章從比較法的角度及歷史脈絡,分析商業事件的需求及程序特性,探討商業訴訟改革的目標與建構商業法院的方向。
第三章延伸視野,介紹各區域(英國、美國、歐洲、亞洲)主要國家籌劃商業法院的經驗及改善商業訴訟的策略,發覺各國多以英國商業法院或英美法(沒有陪審的)商業程序規則為改革藍本。回顧我國的商業法院的建構模式,與程序新制,本章提出比較法的觀察心得。
司法改革無法單靠公部門法院獨善其身,應借重民間專業蓬勃的活力及資訊科技,有效整合各種替代紛爭解決機制(ADR)。第四章檢視商業法院與仲裁、調解或其他爭議解決模式之分工協力與搭配關係,省思法院在眾多機制中適合扮演的角色與應有的轉型,包括以科技重塑法院程序之變革(網路法院計畫),並以實例分析商業事件採行ADR的可能性與挑戰。
商業事件審理法已酌採英美法兼顧公平效率的事證開示與裁判規則。在此基礎上,第五章再擇選:「訴訟前守則(起訴前的紛爭解決規則)、錄取證詞(Deposition作為事證開示方法)、書面證詞、即決裁判、專家證人」等英國或美國法上獨有而細膩的程序規則,作為未來商業訴訟持續提升取證之公平、程序之效率及裁判品質之參考。
第六章為結論與建議。
Efficient courts and quality judicial resolution for commercial disputes have strong link with economic success and competitiveness of a nation. Among global trend of commercial court reform, Taiwan’s newly established Commercial Court (2021) aims to solve the inefficiency problem of the past and to upgrade overall performance of the administration of commercial justice in the future.
Applying historical analysis in Chapter II, this comparative study identifies the purpose and required infrastructure of an ideal commercial court by looking into characteristics of commercial cases and demand of commercial parties with respect to court proceedings or other dispute resolution procedures.
Chapter III discusses major countries’ strategies and experiences in transforming or establishing commercial courts, including developments in London, England, Delaware State of the US, European Union (Germany, France, and Netherlands) and Asia (Singapore, China, and Middle East). English Commercial Court model or the common law rules of civil procedure (excluding jury trial) is welcome by many jurisdictions (while London keeps on innovation such as evidentiary rules).
Chapter IV addresses correlation and collaboration between commercial court and various Alternative Dispute Resolutions (ADRs)—including arbitration, mediation and the Online Dispute Resolution (ODR). Author explores proper role of a judge in recommending or conducting ADRs and the integration of ADR or ODR into court procedure. Feasibility of ADRs for certain commercial cases is also discussed.
Chapter V stocktakes Taiwan’s existing rules for fact-finding and efficient judgment, and proposes stronger discovery and case management rules of common law--such as pre-action protocols, deposition, witness statement, and summary judgement—for a more equal, efficient and quality resolution of commercial disputes.
Chapter VI concludes the dissertation.
一、中文文獻

書籍
1.Randy J. Holland著,林建中譯,Randy J. Holland在台公司法演講集,中華公司治理協會,2019年10月。
2.Richard Susskind著,何廣越譯, Online Courts And The Future Of Justice, 2019 Oxford University Press. (中文版:線上法院與未來司法,北京大學出版社,2021年5月。)
3.古嘉諄、張宇維、符玉章、張世宏、林建中、吳詩敏等,促進式調解--文章集,中華民國仲裁協會爭議調解中心,2021年12月。
4.何其生主編,國際商事法院研究,北京:法律出版社,2019年9月,第1版。
5.沈冠伶,訴訟權保障與裁判外紛爭處理,元照出版社,2012年1月,第2版。
6.邱聯恭,司法之現代化與程序法,三民書局,1992年4月。
7.邱聯恭,司法之現代化與程序法,三民書局,1997年3月。
8.邱聯恭,爭點整理方法論,自版,2011年11月。
9.紐文英,質性研究方法與論文寫作,雙葉書廊有限公司出版,2013年2月。
10.藍元駿譯,John Henry Merryman and Rogelio Perez-Perdomo, The Civil Law Tradition: An Introduction to the Legal Systems of Europe and Latin Amercia, (3d ed. 2007).(中文版:大陸法傳統—西歐與拉丁美洲的法律制度概述,五南,2020年3月。)

專書論文
1.沈方維等,爭點整理結果與爭點簡化協議之辨明(沈方維報告)及座談紀錄,民事訴訟法研究會第142次研討紀錄(2019年6月),民事訴訟法研究基金會編印民事訴訟法之研討(二十五),元照出版,2021年1月。
2.沈冠伶,仲裁鑑定制度之研究,訴訟權保障與裁判外紛爭解決,元照出版,2012年1月,第2版。
3.邱聯恭,民事訴訟法研究會第28次研討紀錄會後補註,民事訴訟法研究基金會編「民事訴訟法之研討(三)」,三民書局出版,1990年8月。
4.邱聯恭,民事訴訟法研究會第30次研討會之報告及會後補註,民事訴訟法研究會編「民事訴訟法之研討(三)」,三民書局出版,1990年8月。
5.邱聯恭,民事訴訟法研究會第32次研討紀錄,民事訴訟法研究基金會編印「民事訴訟法之研討(三)」,三民書局出版,1990年8月。
6.邱聯恭,準備程序之省思,民事訴訟法研究基金會編「民事訴訟法之研討(四)」,三民書局出版,1993年12月。
7.邱聯恭,民事訴訟法研究會第50次研討會後補註,民事訴訟法基金會編「民事訴訟法之研討(五)」,三民書局出版,1996年10月。
8.邱聯恭,民事訴訟法修正後之程序法學,程序利益保護論,元照出版,2005年4月。
9.邱聯恭,專家(專業委員)諮詢程序法制化之指標,民事訴訟法研究會第146次研討紀錄之書面意見,民事訴訟法之研討(二十五),元照出版,2021年1月。
10.許士宦,民事訴訟事實審引進律師強制代理制度之立法論,訴訟理論與審判實務,元照出版,2011年12月。
11.許士宦,文書之開示與秘匿,證據蒐集與紛爭解決,新學林出版社,2014年12月,第2版。
12.許士宦,證人之書狀陳述,證據蒐集與紛爭解決,新學林出版,2014年12月,第2版。
13.陳石獅,民事訴訟法研究會第50次研討報告「事證開示制度(Discovery)與發現真實」及研討記錄,民事訴訟法基金會編「民事訴訟法之研討(五)」,三民書局出版,1996年10月。
14.陳毓秀等,爭點整理方法於審判實務之運用—兼談「爭點整理協議之效力」(陳毓秀報告)及座談紀錄,民事訴訟法第143次研討紀錄(2019年9月8日),民事訴訟法研究基金會編印民事訴訟法之研討(二十五),元照出版,2021年1月。
15.楊崇森,英美商務仲裁制度,司法行政部63年度研究發展叢書,1973年10月。
16.謝銘洋,從德國法看我國專利行政訴訟採對審制的可行性,智慧財產訴訟制度相關論文彙編,第5輯,司法院,2016年12月。

期刊專文
1.Donald F. Parsons Jr. and Joseph R. Slights III,周懷平、朱德芳、李維心合譯,美國商業法庭的先驅:德拉瓦州商業法庭的卓越歷史(The History of Delaware's Business Courts- their rise to preeminence),司法週刊,第1417期,2008年11月,第2至3版。
2.Peter A. Windel,陳瑋佑譯,我們是否需要商事審判權?月旦法學雜誌,第268期,頁169-179,2017年9月。
3.Randy J. Holland,陳玉曆、李維心合譯,美國商業法庭先驅-德拉瓦州各法院(Delaware’s Business Courts: Litigation Leadership),司法周刊,第1436期,2009年4月。
4.王文宇,台新彰銀案之解決—評台灣高等法院108年度上更一字第77號民事判決,月旦裁判時報,第104期,頁33-39,2021年2月。
5.王泰升,再訪臺灣的調解制度:對傳統的現代化轉譯,臺灣史研究,第25卷,第1期,頁101-136,2017年12月。
6.王銘勇,商業事件審理新制評析—當事人查詢、專家證人及秘密保持命令,全國律師,第24卷,第3期,頁30-47,2020年3月。
7.李維心,建立商事法庭芻議,月旦法學雜誌,第177期,頁68-90,2010年2月。
8.沈冠伶,證據保全制度--從擴大制度機能之觀點談起,月旦法學雜誌,第76期,頁52-69,2001年9月。
9.沈冠伶,從「超國界民事訴訟原則」論民事訴訟中法院與當事人之任務分配—「協力」作為民事訴訟之基本原則,月旦法學雜誌,第228期,頁26-52,2015年5月。
10.沈冠伶,商業事件之裁判外紛爭處理—以商業法院之調解及移付仲裁為中心,月旦法學教室,第218期,頁32-58,2020年12月。
11.沈冠伶,商業公司事件之定暫時狀態處分—公司治理、暫時權利保護制度與商業法院之機能,月旦法學雜誌,第310期,頁50-83,2021年3月。
12.沈冠伶,數位化時代的裁判外紛爭處理—從ADR到ODR的程序保障,政大法學評論,第166期,頁227-312,2021年9月。
13.林俊宏,初探電子商務糾紛與線上仲裁制度—以美國經驗為例,仲裁季刊,第101期,頁98-120,2015年4月。
14.林恒志,股東提案權爭議與商業事件審理新制之探討,臺灣財經法學論叢,第4卷,第1期,頁1-64,2022年1月。
15.林超駿,初論法庭之友與美國最高法院──兼評大審法草案相關規定,月旦法學雜誌,第227期,頁198-231,2014年4月。
16.邱筱雯、林志潔,鑑定和專家證人制度之比較與鑑識會計制度建構之建議,會計師期刊,第262期,頁17-33,2015年3月。
17.邵靖惠,商審法之簡析—兼評英美法專家證人制度,萬國法律,第230期,頁9-18,2020年4月。
18.洪秀芬,商審法之商業訴訟事件範圍的探討,發表於世新大學法律學院舉辦之公司爭訟與商業法院審理新制學術研討會,臺灣財經法學論叢,第4卷,第1期,頁151-192,2022年1月。
19.張心悌、朱德芳,商業法庭於美國發展現況與趨勢之研究,月旦法學雜誌,第177期,頁5-33,2010年2月。
20.張文郁,關於行政法上和解契約適用之疑義探討,台灣法學雜誌,第338期,頁27-48,2018年2月。
21.許士宦,集中審理制度之新審理原則,國立臺灣大學法學論叢,第38卷,第2期,頁1-70,2009年6月。
22.許士宦,商業訴訟程序之新變革(上)--當事人主導型訴訟模式之邁進,月旦法學教室,第213期,頁31-45,2020年7月。
23.許士宦,商業訴訟程序之新變革(下)--當事人主導型訴訟模式之邁進,月旦法學教室,第214期,頁31-44,2020年8月。
24.陳春山,設立商事法院之重大議題簡析,全國律師,第21卷,第11期,頁53-60,2017年11月。
25.陳春山,商審法的立法緣起與前瞻,萬國法律,第230期,頁3-8,2020年4月。
26.陳瑋佑,論商審法上之律師強制代理制度—以其適用範圍為中心,月旦法學雜誌,第219期,頁34-48,2021年1月。
27.陳賜良,談ADR概念下的法學教育與司法程序,司法週刊,第1475期,2010年1月。
28.陳鵬光、黃新為,商業事件審理法重點評析—並試以律師角度設想未來可能因應,萬國法律,第237期,頁28-38,2021年6月。
29.曾宛如,商業事件之審理與裁判之改善—對商審法之期待,月旦法學雜誌,第310期,頁28-49,2021年3月。
30.黃兆揚,設置商業法院相關議題分析—以訴訟保密機制為例,財金法學研究,第2卷,第2期,頁259-292,2019年6月。
31.黃柄縉,商業事件審理新紀元—商審法制訂重點解析,司法週刊,第2061期,2021年7月。
32.黃朝琮,由Fiduciary Duty之翻譯試詮其理解,中律會訊,第21卷,第1期,頁41-57,2018年9月。
33.黃朝琮,商業法院之管轄範圍—若干事件之檢討,律師法學期刊,第6期,頁27-41,2021年6月。
34.黃朝琮,商事定暫時狀態處分與股東事前救濟,律師法學期刊,第7期,頁73-94,2021年12月。
35.黃源浩,2019年開始的法國民事訴訟改革,法學叢刊,第66卷,第1期,頁39-70,2021年1月。
36.楊崇森,仲裁程序證據調查面面觀,仲裁季刊,第79期,頁1-24,2006年11月。
37.楊崇森,美國民事訴訟制度之特色與對我國之啟示,軍法專刊,第56卷,第5期,頁5-44,2010年。
38.劉孔中、馮震宇、謝銘洋,專利證據保全及智慧財產權人相關資訊實體請求權之研究,月旦法學雜誌,第226期,頁75-105,2014年3月。
39.劉定基,法庭之友的制度設計─兼論其與鑑定人制度的異同,臺北大學法學論叢,第117期,頁1-54,2021年3月。
40.劉連煜,董事責任與經營判斷法則的運用—從我國司法判決看經營判斷法則的發展,財金法學研究,第3卷,第1期,頁1-34,2020年3月。
41.蔡英欣,日本商事案件審理之法庭組織與程序-以東京地方法院商業法庭為例,月旦法學雜誌,第177期,頁48-67,2010年2月。
42.蔡惠如,商業事件審理之翻轉,月旦法學雜誌,第299期,頁179-194,2020年4月。
43.謝銘洋,智慧財產法院之設置與專利商標行政救濟制度之改進,月旦法學雜誌,第139期,頁5-17,2006年12月。
44.鍾元珧,完善商審法—讓商業法院充分發揮效能,工商會務,第118期,頁28-31,2020年1月。

研究報告
1.司法院民事廳,訴訟外紛爭解決機制整合報告,司法院專題研究報告,2018年2月。
2.李維心,我國智慧財產行政訴訟採行對審制之可行性研究,司法院專題研究報告,司法研究年報,第36輯(行政類),2020年3月。
3.林志潔、劉芳伶、連孟琦、金孟華、蘇凱平共同主持,司法院107 年度「鑑定人揭露事項委託研究案」研究計畫期末報告,2019年3月。
4.林欣蓉,美國商業法院(庭)考察報告,司法院及所屬各機關出國考察報告,2015年10月。
5.林昱梅,我國專利商標無效訴訟程序採對審制之研究—研究成果報告,司法院109年度委託學者專題研究案,2020年12月.
6.邱璿如,日本商事法庭考察報告,司法院及所屬各機關出國考察報告,2015年10月。
7.建業法律事務所,「建構現代化商業爭議處理機制之研究」研討會會議記錄,國家發展委員會指導之研究報告,2015年3月。
8.張升星,荷蘭、丹麥商業法院考察報告,司法院及所屬各機關出國考察報告,2016年1月。
9.許士宦、陳瑋佑,民事訴訟事實審之律師強制代理,司法院105年度委託專題研究案研究成果報告。

學位論文
1.吳羚榛,論現代型訴訟下事證開示之運用─兼從經濟效率觀點探討,中國文化大學法律學研究所碩士論文,2009年6月。
2.林莆晉,論我國商事法院之設立-以新加坡國際商事法院為借鏡,國立台灣大學法律學研究所碩士論文,2015年。
3.邱靖棠,集中審理準備程序之研究—以美國預審制度為借鑑,國立臺灣大學法律學院法律研究所碩士論文,2015年8月。
4.廖乙潔,我國商業法院設置之研究,國立臺北大學法律學系碩士論文,2019年1月。

實務案例
1.臺北高等行政法院99年訴字第1258號行政判決。
2.最高行政法院102年判字第270號行政判決。
3.臺灣高等法院99年度金上重更(一)字第4號刑事(確定)判決。
4.臺灣高等法院104年度重上更(三)字第49號民事(確定)判決。
5.臺灣高等法院99年度訴字第2號民事(確定)判決。
6.臺灣高等法院99年度重訴訟字第47號民事(確定)判決。
(以上係太平洋百貨SOGO企業經營權爭奪案,股東間爭議纏訟近20年)
7.臺灣臺北地方法院103年金字第104號民事判決。
8.臺灣高等法院105年度重上字第621號民事判決。
9.最高法院106年度台上字第2329號民事判決。
10.最高法院106年度台上字第928號民事判決。
11.臺灣高等法院108年度上更(一)字第77號民事判決。
(以上4件係台新金控與財政部就彰化銀行經營權的爭奪案歷審判決,爭點為表決權契約的效力、契約解釋、誠信原則)
12.臺灣臺北地方法院94年度金字第22號民事判決。
(投保中心對太電公司及負責人民事求償,纏訟13年,一審判決日期:107年2月9日,目前二審「臺灣高等法院 107 年度金上字第3號」繫屬中)
13.臺灣高等法院 105 年金上重更(二)字第8號刑事判決。
14.最高法院 107 年台上字第 3697號刑事判決(撤銷發回)。
15.臺灣高等法院107年度金上重更三字第16號。
16.最高法院110年台上字第1489號(駁回被告上訴,判決確定)。
(以上4件係陽信銀行超貸案,纏訟13年,爭點為銀行員與董事的注意義務)
17.智慧財產及商業法院110年度商暫字第1號民事裁定。
(商業法院受理第一件定暫時狀態處分事件,法院駁回「東元電機」請求暫時禁止所投資企業「菱光科技」提前召開預訂之股東會)
18.智慧財產及商業法院110年度商暫字第2號民事裁定。
(商業法院第一件准許之定暫時狀態處分案:准許「南港輪胎」提供擔保後暫定禁止所投資企業「泰豐輪胎」出售主要資產事件)
19.智慧財產及商業法院110年度商暫字第6號、7號、8號、9號、11號、12號、13號、15號裁定。(「光洋科技」董事間各自提前召集股東會並禁止他方召集股東會以全面改選董事之經營權爭奪案)

二、英文文獻

專書
1.ALDISERT, RUGGERO J., OPINION WRITING (AuthorHouse, United States, 2d ed. 2009).
2.ANDREWS, NEIL, THE THREE PATHS OF JUSTICE--COURT PROCEEDINGS, ARBITRATION, AND MEDIATION IN ENGLAND (Springer International Publishing, New York, 2018).
3.EIDENMUELLER, HORST G. M., REGULATORY COMPETITION IN CONTRACT LAW AND DISPUTE RESOLUTION (University of Oxford, United Kingdom, 2013), available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2201772 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2201772.
4.ERICHSON, HOWARD M.& GLOVER, J. MARIA, CIVIL PROCEDURE (Wolters Kluwer Law & Business, 2021).
5.FRIEDENTHAL, JACK H., KAY KANE, MARY & R. MILLER, ARTHUR, CIVIL PROCEDURE (Westgroup Publication, 3d ed.1999).
6.KARTON, JOSHUA D H, THE CULTURE OF INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION AND THE EVOLUTION OF CONTRACT LAW (Oxford University Press, United Kingdom, 2013).
7.KATSH, ETHAN & RIFKIN, JANET, ONLINE DISPUTE RESOLUTION: RESOLVING CONFLICTS IN CYBERSPACE (Jossey-Bass, United States, 2001).
8.KRAAKMAN, REINIER ET AL., THE ANATOMY OF CORPORATE LAW: A COMPARATIVE AND FUNCTIONAL APPROACH (University of Oxford, United Kingdom, 2004).
9.O’HARE, JOHN & BROWNE, KEVIN, CIVIL LITIGATION (Sweet & Maxwell Ltd, United Kingdom, 19th ed. 2019).
10.ROMANO, ROBERTA, THE GENIUS OF AMERICAN CORPORATE LAW (American Enterprise Institute Press, Washington, DC, 1993).
11.SALACUSE, JESWALD W., THE THREE LAWS OF INTERNATIONAL INVESTMNENT: NATIONAL, CONTRACTUAL AND INTERNATIONAL FRAMEWORK FOR FOREIGN CAPITAL (Oxford University Press, United Kingdom, 2013).
12.SUSAN BLAKE, JULIE BROWNE AND STUART SIME, THE JACKSON ADR HANDBOOK, Third Editioin (Oxford University Press Publication, United Kingdom, 2021).
13.BLACK, HENRY CAMPBELL, M. A., BLACK'S LAW DICTIONARY-DEFINITIONS OF THE TERMS AND PHRASES OF AMERICAN AND ENGLISH JURISPRUDENCE, ANCIENT AND MODERN (West Publishing, 4th ed. 1968)
14.GOLDSTEIN, BRANDT, STORMING THE COURT: HOW A BAND OF YALE LAW STUDENTS SUED THE PRESIDENT--AND WON (Scribner, 2005).

專書論文
1.Wagner, Gerhard, Commercial Courts in Germany, in CHEN L., JANSSEN A. ED., DISPUTE RESOLUTION IN CHINA, EUROPE AND WORLD (Springer International Publishing, New York, 2020).
2.Zimmermann, Reinhard, Common Frame of Reference (CFR), in MAX PLANCK ENCYCLOPEDIA OF EUROPEAN PRIVATE LAW (Oxford University Press, United Kingdom, 2012), available at https://max-eup2012.mpipriv.de/index.php/Common_Frame_of_Reference_(CFR) (last visited March 9, 2022).

期刊專文
1.A.A. Berle, Jr., Corporate Powers as Powers in Trust, 44 HARV. L. REV. 1049-74 (1931).
2.American Bar Association, Understanding Injunctions, 14(2) INSIGHTS ON LAW & SOCIETY 16-22 (2014).
3.Antonopoulou, Georgia, Defining International Disputes – Reflections on the Netherlands Commercial Court Proposal, NEDERLANDS INTERNATIONAL PRIVAATRECHT (NIPR) 740-55 (2018).
4.Applebaum, Lee, The “New” Business Courts, 17(4) BUSINESS LAW TODAY 12-7 (2008), avaliable at https://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/publications/blt/2008/03/full-issue-200803.pdf.
5.Aprahamian, Michael J., and Beringer, Jesse L., Out of Sight, Not out of Mind: Deposition Ethics and Best Practices, 88(5) WISCONSIN LAWYER PUBLICATION (2015), available at https://www.wisbar.org/newspublications/wisconsinlawyer/pages/article.aspx?volume=88&issue=5&articleid=24070.
6.Bach, Mitchell L. and Applebaum, Lee, A History of the Creation and Jurisdiction of Business Courts in the Last Decade, 60(1) BUSINESS LAWYER 151-228 (2004).
7.Bauw, Eddy, Commercial Litigation in Europe in Transformation: The Case of the Netherlands Commercial Courts, 12(1) ERASMUS LAW REVIEW 15-23 (2019).
8.Biard, Alexandre, International Commercial Courts in France: Innovation without Revolution? 12(1) ERASMUS LAW REVIEW 24-32 (2019), available at http://www.erasmuslawreview.nl/tijdschrift/ELR/2019/1/ELR-D-18-00023.
9.Brauch, Martin Dietrich, Exhaustion of Local Remedies in International Investment Law: IISD Best Practices Series, INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT 1-28 (2017).
10.Burdick, Francis M., Wha Is the Law Merchant? 2(7) COLUMBIA LAW REVIEW 470-85 (1902).
11.Cleveland, Steven J., 41 Process Innovation in the Production of Corporate Law, U.C. DAVIS. L. REV. 1829-95 (2008).
12.Coase, R. H., The Nature of the Firm, 4(16) ECONOMICA 386-405 (1937).
13.Cook, David, The Lab: All across the world, HCCH A BRIDGED EDITION 2019: THE HCCH SERVICE CONVENTION IN THE ERA OF ELECTRONIC AND INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY 35-38 (2019).
14.Dalhuisen, Jan Hendrik, Legal Orders and Their Manifestation: The Operation of the International Commercial and Financial Legal Order and its Lex Mercatoria (2014), 24 BERKELEY JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL LAW 129-91 (2006).
15.Dammann, Jens and Hansmann, Henry, Globalizing Commercial Litigation, 94(1) CORNELL L. REV. (2008) 1-71, available at https://scholarship.law.cornell.edu/clr/vol94/iss1/7.
16.Dodd, E. Merrick, For Whom Are Corporate Managers Trustees? 45(7) HARV. L. REV. 1145-63 (1932).
17.Dreyfuss, Rochelle C., Forums of the Future, 61(1) BROOK. L. REV. 1-44(1995), available at: http://brooklynworks.brooklaw.edu/blr/vol61/iss1/1.
18.Dreyfuss, Rochelle Cooper, Specialized Adjudication, BYU L. REV. 377-441 (1990).
19.Eward, John S., What Is the Law Merchant? 3(3) COLUMBIA LAW REVIEW 135-154 (1903).
20.Gilson, Ronald J., The Fine Art of Judging: William T. Allen, 22 DEL. J. CORP. L. 914-20 (1997).
21.Gu, WeiXia, Belt and Road Dispute Resolution: New Development Trends, 36 CHINESE (TAIWAN) YEARBOOK OF INTERNATIONAL LAW AND AFFAIRS 150-69 (2018).
22.Hamermesh, Lawrence A., The Policy Foundations of Delaware Corporate Law, 106(7) COLUMBIA LAW REVIEW 1749-92 (2006).
23.Hess, Burkhard, and Boerner, Timon, Chambers for International Commercial Disputes in Germany: The State of Affairs, 12(1) ERASMUS LAW REVIEW 33-41 (2019), available at http://www.erasmuslawreview.nl/tijdschrift/ELR/2019/1/ELR-D-19-00002.
24.Hiscock, Mary, Judicial Support of Arbitration, 11(1) CONTEMPORARY ASIA ARBITRATION JOURNAL (CONTEMP. ASIA ARB. J.) 1-19 (2018). This paper was originally presented in English to the Judicial Yuan in Taiwan on November 13, 2017.
25.Ho¨rnle, Julia, Online Dispute Resolution: The Emperor's New Clothes? 17(1) INTERNATIONAL REVIEW OF LAW, COMPUTERS & TECHNOLOGY 27-37 (2003).
26.Hong-Lin, Yu, Carrot And Stick Approach In English Mediation—There Must Be Another Way, 8(1) CONTEMP. ASIA ARB. J. 81-112 (2015).
27.Huo, Zhengxin, and Yip, Man, Comparing The International Commercial Courts of China With The Singapore International Commercial Court, 68(4) CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS FOR THE BRITISH INSTITUTE OF INTERNATIONAL AND COMPARATIVE LAW QUARTERLY, 903-42 (2019), available at https://www.cambridge.org/core.
28.Hwang, Michael, Commercial courts and international arbitration--competitors or partners? 31(2) ARBITRATION INTERNATIONAL 193-212 (2015).
29.Jiang, Huiqin, Demystifying China’s International Commercial Court Regime: International or Intra-National? 36 CHINESE (TAIWAN) YEARBOOK OF INTERNATIONAL LAW AND AFFAIRS 170-193 (2018).
30.Jr., Geoffrey C. Hazard, From Whom No Secrets Are Hid, 76(7) TEX. L. REV. 1665-94 (1998).
31.Katyal, Neal K., Judges as Advicegivers, 50(6) STAN. L. REV. 1709-824 (1998).
32.Király, Miklós, The Rise and Fall of Common European Sales Law, ELTE LAW JOURNAL 31-42 (2015).
33.Kramer, Xandra, and Sorabji, John, International Business Courts in Europe and Beyond: A Global Competition for Justice? 12(1) ERASMUS LAW REVIEW 1-9 (2019), available at (http://www.erasmuslawreview.nl/tijdschrift/ELR/2019/1/ELR-D-19-00023)
34.Kroeze, Maarten J., The Dutch Companies and Business Court as a Specialized Court Ondernemingsrecht (Erasmus University Rotterdam) 1-20 (2006), available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=976277 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.976277.
35.Lewis S. Black, Jr. Why Corporations Choose Delaware, DELAWARE DEPARTMENT OF STATE DIVISION OF CORPORATION 1-11 (2007).
36.Li, Nigel N. T., & Chen, Joyce W., Challenges And Fascination: A Message to Neophytes in the Arena of Arbitration, 12(1) CONTEMP. ASIA ARB. J1-20 (2019).
37.Li, Siqing, Convergence of WTO Dispute Settlement and Investor-State Arbitration: A Closer Look at Umbrella Clauses, 19(1) CHICAGO JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL LAW 189-232 (2018).
38.Lye, KC and Chan, Darius, The Singapore International Commercial Court: a challenge to arbitration? NORTON ROSE FULBRIGHT BANKING AND FINANCE DISPUTES REVIEW 1-28 (2015).
39.Macey, Jonathan R., Corporate Law and Corporate Governance: A Contractual Perspective, 18 THE JOURNAL OF CORPORATION LAW 185-211 (1993).
40.Malacka, Michal, Multi-Door Courthouse Established Through The European Mediation Directive? 16(1) INTERNATIONAL AND COMPARATIVE LAW REVIEW 127-142 (2016).
41.Markert, Lars, Arbitrating Corporate Disputes—German Approaches and International Solutions to Reconcile Conflicting Principles, 8(1) CONTEMP. ASIA ARB. J. 29-60 (2015).
42.McFadden, Danny, Developments In International Commercial Mediation: US, UK, Asia, India and EU, 8(2) CONTEMP. ASIA ARB. J. 299-336 (2015).
43.Miller, Geoffrey P. and Eisenberg, Theodore, The Market for Contracts, 30(5) CARDOZO LAW REVIEW 2073-98 (2009).
44.Murphy, Bridget, Luke v Lyde - An Analysis, AUKULAW RW 2, 9(4) AUCKLAND U L REV. 1140 (2003).
45.Orts, Eric W., The Complexity And Legitimacy of Corporate Law, 50(4) WASH. & LEE L. REV. 1565-623 (1993).
46.Pappas, Brian A., Med-Arb and the Legalization of Alternative Dispute Resolution, 20(1) HARV. NEGOT. L. REV. 157-203 (2015).
47.Parsons Jr., Donald F. and Slights III, Joseph R., The History of Delaware's Business Courts- their rise to preeminence, 17(4) BUSINESS LAW TODAY 20-25 (2008).
48.Peetermans, Erik and Lambrecht, Philippe, The Brussels International Business Court: Initial Overview and Analysis, 12(1) ERASMUS LAW REVIEW 42-55 (2019).
49.Romano, Roberta, Answering the Wrong Questions: The Tenuous Case for Mandatory Corporate Laws, 89(7) COLUM. L. REV. 1599-617 (1989).
50.Savadkouhi, Saber Habibi, International Commercial Arbitration: A Legal Analysis With Special Reference To The Contemporary Issues Under Indian Law, SHODHGANGA PUBLICATION 86-99 (2014).
51.Schmitz, Amy J. and Rule, Colin, Online Dispute Resolution for Smart Contracts, JOURNAL OF DISPUTE RESOLUTION 103-25 (2019).
52.Schwenzer, Ingeborg and Hachem, Pascal, The CISG- successes and pitfalls, 57(2) THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF COMPARATIVE LAW 457-78 (2009), available at https://edoc.unibas.ch/6761/2/20161129094648_583d40787f830.pdf.
53.Simmons, Omari Scott, Branding the Small Wonder: Delaware’s Dominance and the Market for Corporate Law, 42 U. RICH. L. REV. 1129-93 (2008).
54.Slights, Joseph R., and A. Powers, Elizabeth. Delaware Courts Continue to Excel in Business Litigation with the Success of the Complex Commercial Litigation Division of the Superior Court, 70(4) THE BUSINESS LAWYER, AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION 1039–58 (2015), available at https://www.jstor.org/stable/26417526.
55.Smith, D. Goron, The Shareholder Primacy Norm, 23(2) J. CROP. L. 277-323 (1998).
56.Sorabji, John and Kramer, Xandra E., Introduction – The International Business of Courts, INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS COURTS: A EUROPEAN AND GLOBAL PERSPECTIVE1-20 (2019), available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3519570.
57.Sternlight, Jean R., Creeping Mandatory Arbitration: Is It Just? 57 SCHOLARLY WORKS 1631-75 (2005), available at https://scholars.law.unlv.edu/facpub/280.
58.Subrin, Stephen N., Discovery in Global Perspective: Are We Nuts? 52 DEPAL L. REV. 299-318 (2002).
59.Sunderland, Edson R., The New Federal Rules, 45(1) W. VA. L. REV. 1-26 (1938).
60.Tennille, Benjamin F., Applebaum, Lee and Tucker Nees, Anne, Getting to Yes in Specialized Courts: The Unique Role of ADR in Business Court Cases, 11(1) PEPPERDINE DISPUTE RESOLUTION LAW JOURNAL 35-89 (2010).
61.Themeli, Erlis, Matchmaking International Commercial Courts and Lawyers’ Preferences in Europe, 12(1) ERASMUS LAW REVIEW 70-81 (2019), available at http://www.erasmuslawreview.nl/tijdschrift/ELR/2019/1/ELR-D-19-00029.
62.Tucker, Anne M., Making a Case for Business Courts: a Survey of and Proposed Framework to Evaluate Business Courts, 24(2) GEORGIA STATE UNIVERSITY LAW REVIEW 477-532 (2012), available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1542062.
63.Vernadaki, Zampia, Civil Procedure Harmonization in the EU: Unravelling the Policy Considerations, 9(2) JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY EUROPEAN RESEARCH 297-312 (2013).
64.Vogenauer, Stefan, Regulatory Competition through Choice of Contract Law an Choice of Forum in Europe: Theory and Evidence, 21(1) EUROPEAN REVIEW OF PRIVATE LAW 13-78 (2013).
65.Wilske, Stephan, International Commercial Courts and Arbitration—Alternatives, Substitutes or Trojan Horse? 11(2) CONTEMP. ASIA ARB. J. 153-192 (2018).
66.Wise, Robert K. and Wooten, Kennon L., The Practitioner’s Guide to Properly Taking and Defending Depositions Under the Texas Discovery Rules, 68(2) BAYLOR LAW REVIEW 402-563 (2016), available at https://www.baylor.edu/law/review/doc.php/270986.pdf.
67.Wolski, Bobette, Arb-Med-Arb (And MSAs): A Whole Which Is Less Than, Not Greater Than, The Sum of Its Parts? 6(2) CONTEMP. ASIA ARB. J. 249-274 (2013).
68.Yip, Man, The Resolution of Disputes Before the Singapore International Commercial Court, INTERNATIONAL AND COMPARATIVE LAW QUARTERLY 65(2), 439-473 (2016).
69.Yip, Man, The Singapore International Commercial Court: The Future of Litigation? 12(1) ERASMUS LAW REVIEW 82-97 (2019), available at http://www.erasmuslawreview.nl/tijdschrift/ELR/2019/1/ELR-D-18-00022.

研究報告
1.Baïssus, Jean-Marc, Legal competitiveness, in Fondation pour le droit continental (Newsletter, English version, 2010).
2.C.H. van Rhee, Harmonisation of Civil Procedure: An Historical and Comparative Perspective, Maastricht European Private Law Institutue working paper No. 2011/28 (2011).
3.Clarke, Kenneth and Green, Lord, Plan for Growth: Promoting the UK’s Legal Services Sectol, in Ministry of Justice (UK) (2011).
4.Drabek, Zdenek, A Multilateral Agreement on Investment: Convincing the Sceptics, a staff working paper ERAD-98-05 for World Trade Organization Economic Research and Analysis Division (1998).
5.Evas, Tatjana, Expedited settlement of commercial disputes in the European Union (European Added Value Assessment accompanying the European Parliament’s legislative initiative report), a study by European Parliamentary Research Service (2018).
6.G. C. Hazard, Jr., R. Stürner, M. Taruffo and A. Gidi, Draft Rules of Transnational Civil Procedure with Comments, UNIDROIT (2004).
7.G20/OECD Principles of Corporate Governance (2015).
8.Gramckow, Heike, Omniah Ebeid with Erica Bosio and Jorge Luis Silva Mendez, Good Practices For Courts--Helpful Elements for Good Court Performance and the World Bank’s Quality of Judicial Process Indicators, World Bank (2016).
9.Judiciary of England and Wales, The Commercial Court Report 2020-2021 (including the Admiralty Court Report), 2022.
10.Legal Guide to Uniform Instruments in the Area of International Commercial Contracts, with a Focus on Sales, United Nations Publication (2021).
11.Legal high Committee for Financial markets of Paris (HCJP), Recommendations For The Creation Of Special Tribunals For International Business Disuptes (2017).
12.Lein, Eva, et al (British Institute of Internatonal and Comparative Law), Facotrs Influencing International Litigants’ Decisions to Bring Commercial Claims to the London Based Courts, (Ministry of Justice Analytical Series, 2015).
13.Lord Justice Briggs(UK), Civil Court Structure Review: Final Report (2016).
14.Lord Justice Jackson(UK), Review of Civil Litigation Costs: Final Report (2010).
15.Lord Woolf(UK), Access to Justice- Final Report, Chapter 10 (1996).
16.Maas, Heiko, as Federal Minister of Justice and Consumer Protection, Law Made in Germany (2008).
17.Morossi, Daniele, Political and economic relations between Venice, Byzantium and Southern Italy (1081-1197), PHD thesis of the University of Leeds, School of History, September 2018.
18.OECD, What Makes Civil Justice Effective? OECD Economics Department Policy Notes, No. 18 (2013).
19.Prada, M., Certains facteurs de renforcement de la compétitivité juridique de la place de Paris (2011).
20.Pre-Concept Note for the Business Enabling Environment (BEE) project, World Bank Group (2022).
21.Recommendation of the Council on Artificial Intelligence, Section I, paragraphs 1.1-1.5, OECD/LEGAL/0449 (2019).
22.Report of the European Law Institute(ELI) and of the European Network of Councils for the Judiciary(ENCJ), The Relationship between Formal and Informal Justice: the Courts and Alternative Dispute Resolution, a joint project by The ELI and The ENCJ (2018).
23.Review of Pre-Action Protocols- Interim Report November 2021, (Appendix 3- A Brief History of Pre-Action Protocols).
24.Rudolf Braun, Tillmann, Investment Protection under WTO law—New Developments in the Aftermath of Cancun (2004).
25.Ruehl, Giesela, Building Competence in Commercial Law in the Member States, a study published by the European Parliament’s Policy Department for Citizens’ Rights and Constitutional Affairs, at the request of the European Parliament’s Committee on Legal Affairs (JURI Committee) (2018).
26.The HCJP, Report On The Implicaitons Of BREXIT on judicial cooperation in civil and commercial matters.
27.The LawTech Delivery Panel UK Jurisdiction Taskforce, Legal statement on cryptoassets and smart contracts (2019).
28.UK Jurisdiction Taskforce, Digital Dispute Resolution Rules, (Version 1.0, 2010).
29.Yannaca-Small, K., Interpretation of the Umbrella Clause in Investment Agreements, OECD Working Papers on International Investment (OECD Publishing, 2006).

演講
1.Amalia D. Kessler, Our Inquisitorial Tradition: Equity Procedure, Due Process, and the Search for an Alternative to the Adversarial, 90 CORNELL L. REV. 1181 (2005).
2.Antonopoulou, Georgia, Procedure Before International Commercial and Ordinary Courts: A Comparative Perspective (July 22, 2021). Stavros Brekoulakis and Georgios Dimitropoulos (ed), International Commercial Courts: The Future of Transnational Litigation; Cambridge University Press, Forthcoming.
3.Taylor, Bryan, The First and the Greatest: The Rise and Fall of the United East India Company, Global Financial Data (September 17, 2018).
4.Chief Justice James Allsop of the Federal Court of Australia & Justice Clyde Croft of the Supreme Court of Victoria, Judicial Support of Arbitration, A paper presented at the APRAG Tenth Anniversary Conference, Melbourne (March 28, 2014).
5.Debevoise & Plimpton LLP., 10 Things U.S. Litigators Should Know About Court Litigation in France (2017).
6.Veasey, E. Norman (Chief Justice of Delaware, 1992-2004), The Role of the Judiciary in Corporate Law, Corporate Governance and Economic Goals, presented in Sweden on 7-8 December 2000 for the event of Company Law Reform in OECD Countries: A Comparative Out Look of Current Trends.
7.Siller, Ezra, The Origins of the Oral Deposition in the Federal Rules: Who’s In Charge? 10(1)(2) SETON HALL CIRCUIT REVIEW (2014).
8.Hess, Burkhard, The rise of International Commercial Courts in Europe, with a special focus on the “Justice Initiative” in Germany, a seminar lecture presented in the Taiwan Judges’ Academy (2018).
9.Hiscock, Mary, Judicial Support of Arbitration (presented to Judicial Yuan in Taiwan, November 13, 2018).
10.Holland, Randy J., Delaware’s Business Courts: Litigation Leadership, a lecture presented for the Taiwan Judges’ Academy (2009).
11.Holland, Randy J., Judicial Case Management, a lecture presented for the Taiwan Judges’ Academy (2019).
12.Pistor, Katharina et al., The Evolution of Corporate Law: A Cross-Country Comparison, 23 U. PA. J. INT’L ECON. L. 791 (2002)
13.Sir Geoffrey Vos, London International Disputes Week 2021: Keynote Speech (May 10, 2021).
14.Skeel, David A. Jr., Corporate Anatomy Lessons, 113 YALE L. J. 1519 (2004).
15.The Lord Thomas of Cwmgiedd (Lord Chief Justice of England and Wales), Commercial Justice in the global village: the role of commercial courts, a lecture for the DIFC Academy of Law Lecture, Dubai (2016).
16.Warren AC., Marilyn (Chief Justice of Victoria) and Croft, Clyde (Justice), An International Commercial Court for Australia- Looking beyond the New York Convention, remarks at the Commercial CPD Seminar Series, Melbourne 17-25 (2016), available at http://assets.justice.vic.gov.au/supreme/resources/2a7ead53-9ae9-4e26-9bad-56ef25d7d34c/aninternationalcommercialcourtforaustralialookingbeyondthenewyorkconvention.pdf.

案例、法規、實務指南
1.Bg Group PLC. v. Republic of Argentina - Case No. U.S. 12-138 (2014) - U.S. Supreme Court.
2.Business and Property Courts of the Judiciary of England and Wales, The Commercial Court Report 2017-2018 (including the Admiralty Court Report) (2019). (英國英格蘭與威爾斯商業與財產法院年報)
3.Judiciary of England and Wales, The Commercial Court Report 2020-2021 (including the Admiralty Court Report) (2022).
4.Commercial and Corporations Practice Note (C&C-1), 5.4 (Concise Statement Method), 8 (Discovery, Redfern and Memorial Procedures), as the version of JLB Allsop, Chief Justice (October 25, 2016).
5.Commercial Arbitration Rules and Mediation Procedures (including Procedures for Large, Complex Commercial Disputes), Prepared by American Arbitration Association (adr.org/commercial) (rules amended and effective, October 1, 2013; fee schedule amended and effective, November 1, 2014). (美國仲裁協會仲裁與調解規則)
6.CTS Corp. v. Dynamics Corp. of Am., 481 U.S. 69, 91 (1987).
7.Delaware Supreme Court Internal Operating Procedures.(德拉瓦州最高法院內部運作程序)
8.Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (FED. R. Cvl. P)(美國聯邦民事訴訟規則)
9.Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure (FED. R. Crim. P)(美國聯邦刑事訴訟規則)
10.Federal Rules of Evidence 2021 Edition (美國聯邦證據規則2021年版)
11.https://www.supremecourt.gov.sg/docs/default-source/default-document-library/ sicc-practice-directions---amended-version-(1-November-final).pdf
12.London Court of International Arbitration (LCIA) Arbitration Rules (effective on October 1, 2014). (倫敦國際仲裁法庭仲裁規則)
13.SGS Societe Generale de Surveillance S.A. v. Pakistan, ICSID case ARB/01/13, Decision On Jurisdiction, 18 ICSID rev-F.I.L.J. 307 (2003)
14.Singapore International Commercial Court (SICC) User Guides (version as at January 31, 2019). (新加坡國際商業法院使用手冊) (https://www.sicc.gov.sg/docs/default-source/legislation-rules-pd/sicc-user-guides-31jan19.pdf)
15.Singapore International Commercial Court Practice Directions (effective 1 November 2018). (新加坡國際商業法院實務指南)
16.Subpoena to Testify at a Deposition in a Civil Action, United States Courts, (Effective on December 1, 2020). (美國聯邦法院律師取證民事傳票) (https://www.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/ao088a.pdf)
17.The Commercial Court Guide (Eleven Edition, 2022).
18.The Commercial Court Guide incorporating The Admiralty Court Guide with The Financial List Guide, The Circuit Commercial (Mercantile) Court Guide, edited by the Judges of the Commercial Court of England & Wales, Tenth Edition (2017). (英國英格蘭與威爾斯商業法官編輯之商業法庭實務指南第10版)
19.The Japanese Judicial System, by The Secretariat of the Judicial Reform Council (July 1999).
20.Toto Construzioni v. Mongolia, PCA Case No. 2011-09, Decision on Jurisdiction (2012).
21.Haitian Centers Council, Inc.v. McNary, 789 F. Supp. 541 (E.D.N.Y. 1992).
22.Tai-Heng Cheng, Reflections on Culture in Med-Arb, NYLS Legal Studies Research Paper No. 09/10 #34 (2010).



參考網站
https://uncitral.un.org/ (聯合國國際貿易法委員會網站)
http://www.worldbank.org/ (世界銀行網站)
https://icsid.worldbank.org/resources (國際投資爭端解決中心網站)
https://www.oecd.org/ (經濟合作發展組織網站)
https://www.wto.org/ (世界貿易組織網站)
https://iccwbo.org/ (國際商會網站)
https://www.rechtspraak.nl/English/NCC/Pages/default.aspx (荷蘭商業法院網站)
https://www.sicc.gov.sg/guide-to-the-sicc/sicc-proceedings-in-general (新加坡國際商業法院網站)
https://e-justice.europa.eu/content_european_judicial_network_in_civil_and_commercial_matters-21-en.do (歐盟司法網絡--民商法事務)
https://www.greffe-tc-paris.fr/en/ (法國巴黎商業法院網站)
https://web.archive.org/web/20181011130140/https://www.rechtbanken-tribunaux.be/fr (比利時法院及法庭入口網站)
https://www.commercial-court.de/en/commercial-court (德國巴登-符腾堡邦斯圖加特和曼海姆商業法庭網站)
https://www.supremecourt.vic.gov.au/law-and-practice/areas-of-the-court/commercial-court (澳洲維多利亞州最高法院商業法庭網站)
http://delhihighcourt.nic.in/index.asp (印度德里高院網站)
http://www.mp.gov.my/en/ (馬來西亞產業法院網站)
https://www.dc.gov.ae/ (杜拜商業法院網站)
https://www.uscourts.gov/ (美國聯邦法院入口網站)
https://www.namadr.com/ (美國全國仲裁與調解協會網站)
 
 
 
 
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
QR Code
QRCODE