{"created":"2023-06-20T15:28:18.349891+00:00","id":7306,"links":{},"metadata":{"_buckets":{"deposit":"2a5b93bb-836a-4c72-97d4-b1bafb170c0c"},"_deposit":{"created_by":3,"id":"7306","owners":[3],"pid":{"revision_id":0,"type":"depid","value":"7306"},"status":"published"},"_oai":{"id":"oai:ouj.repo.nii.ac.jp:00007306","sets":["470:394:453"]},"author_link":["9042","9043"],"item_10002_biblio_info_7":{"attribute_name":"書誌情報","attribute_value_mlt":[{"bibliographicIssueDates":{"bibliographicIssueDate":"1992-03-30","bibliographicIssueDateType":"Issued"},"bibliographicPageEnd":"90","bibliographicPageStart":"75","bibliographicVolumeNumber":"9","bibliographic_titles":[{"bibliographic_title":"放送大学研究年報"},{"bibliographic_title":"Journal of the University of the Air","bibliographic_titleLang":"en"}]}]},"item_10002_source_id_11":{"attribute_name":"書誌レコードID","attribute_value_mlt":[{"subitem_source_identifier":"AN10019636","subitem_source_identifier_type":"NCID"}]},"item_10002_source_id_9":{"attribute_name":"ISSN","attribute_value_mlt":[{"subitem_source_identifier":"0911-4505","subitem_source_identifier_type":"ISSN"}]},"item_10002_textarea_25":{"attribute_name":"抄録（英）","attribute_value_mlt":[{"subitem_textarea_language":"en","subitem_textarea_value":"　Arbitration is one of the alternative dispute resolutions (ADR) to litigation, fundamentally subject to private autonomy; i.e. parties may determine with their agreement how the arbitral panel and the arbitral procedure should be set up, and what rules the arbitrator(s) should apply. This characteristic is quite different from litigation where the law, both substantive and procedural, is strictly obeyed.\n　For this reason, parties to international commercial trade often submit their contractual disputes to arbitration, in order to have them resolved outside the sphere of any one national legal system. In fact, arbitral adjudication is accepted by most nations in respect of the arbitral procedure and legal recognition and enforcement of awards: e.g. UNCITRAL (United Nations Commission on Interna-tional Trade Law) arbitration rule or model law, the New York Convention in 1958. This universal acceptance represents a result of the continuing evolution of international arbitral procedure. On the other hand, arbitral adjudicatien also needs to fulfill a substantive mission so as to function as a truly useful device. From this point of view, it is proposed and expected that some substantive rules be elaborated as a general arbitral principle of stare decisis, as it were lex mercatoria arbitralis, through \"reasons\" of arbitral awards.\n　In the practice of international commercial arbitration, however, arbitral award is mostly rendered without reasons. Under this condition, the following questions arise: Would it cause trouble or confusion, if the practice of rendering awards with \"reasons\" is compulsorily introduced? Also, would　such a substantive rule be properly entitled to be named a legal principle? What is, or should be, the function of \"reasons\" of arbitral awards?\n　This paper is a preliminary examination of the questions mentioned above. I will present the perspectives for the discussion first, and then analyze the status quo in Japan, i. e. the regulation of Japanese Code of Civil Procedure and the institutional rule in Japan, and the practice as rendered through court cases."}]},"item_creator":{"attribute_name":"著者","attribute_type":"creator","attribute_value_mlt":[{"creatorNames":[{"creatorName":"猪股, 孝史"},{"creatorName":"イノマタ, タカシ","creatorNameLang":"ja-Kana"}],"nameIdentifiers":[{"nameIdentifier":"9042","nameIdentifierScheme":"WEKO"}]},{"creatorNames":[{"creatorName":"Inomata, Takashi","creatorNameLang":"en"}],"nameIdentifiers":[{"nameIdentifier":"9043","nameIdentifierScheme":"WEKO"}]}]},"item_files":{"attribute_name":"ファイル情報","attribute_type":"file","attribute_value_mlt":[{"accessrole":"open_date","date":[{"dateType":"Available","dateValue":"2013-06-14"}],"displaytype":"detail","filename":"NO_09-75-90.pdf","filesize":[{"value":"1.6 MB"}],"format":"application/pdf","licensetype":"license_note","mimetype":"application/pdf","url":{"label":"NO_09-75-90","url":"https://ouj.repo.nii.ac.jp/record/7306/files/NO_09-75-90.pdf"},"version_id":"31dd8c72-66fd-4624-80ed-8c2db6e5594b"}]},"item_language":{"attribute_name":"言語","attribute_value_mlt":[{"subitem_language":"jpn"}]},"item_resource_type":{"attribute_name":"資源タイプ","attribute_value_mlt":[{"resourcetype":"departmental bulletin paper","resourceuri":"http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501"}]},"item_title":"仲裁判断の「理由」に関する序論的考察(1)","item_titles":{"attribute_name":"タイトル","attribute_value_mlt":[{"subitem_title":"仲裁判断の「理由」に関する序論的考察(1)"},{"subitem_title":"Preliminary Study on \"Reasons\" of Arbitral Awards (1)","subitem_title_language":"en"}]},"item_type_id":"10002","owner":"3","path":["453"],"pubdate":{"attribute_name":"公開日","attribute_value":"2013-06-14"},"publish_date":"2013-06-14","publish_status":"0","recid":"7306","relation_version_is_last":true,"title":["仲裁判断の「理由」に関する序論的考察(1)"],"weko_creator_id":"3","weko_shared_id":3},"updated":"2023-06-20T16:17:57.349573+00:00"}