In the context of the increasingly complex global trade system, international commercial arbitration, as an important mechanism for resolving cross-border disputes, has become a core factor affecting the effectiveness and enforcement of arbitration based on the issue of "nationality" in its rulings. The aim is to systematically explore the nationality recognition standards and legal application issues of commercial arbitration awards in international trade, filling the gap between the current theoretical system and practical mechanisms. Select relevant rules of international arbitration institutions (such as ICC), Chinese foreign-related arbitration cases, and major international conventions as samples, focusing on how the nationality of arbitration awards affects their arbitrability, fairness, and enforceability. By comparing and analyzing the international theoretical foundation and legal practices at home and abroad, combined with case analysis and treaty provisions research, the conflict and reconciliation between the "statutory jurisdiction of arbitration" and "party autonomy" in nationality determination are extracted. Research has found that nationality not only determines the procedural law applicable to arbitration awards, but also directly affects the international recognition and enforcement of the awards. Although China actively adheres to international rules, there are still institutional ambiguities and legislative lag in the nationality restrictions for arbitrators and the nationality selection mechanism for arbitration awards. In theory, it deepens the legal construction of "arbitration nationality" and expands the application boundaries of international commercial arbitration; In practice, it provides reference for China to build a more neutral and internationally recognized arbitration system. However, the complexity of the parties' game and multiple nationality conflicts in arbitration practice remains a challenge, and in the future, further efforts should be made to promote the international unification of arbitration nationality rules and the localization reform of Chinese arbitration law.
Yi Li (Wed,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: