不列颠哥伦比亚是加拿大第二个通过采纳《联合国国际贸易法委员会国际商事仲裁示范法》（“《示范法》”）2006修正案使其国际仲裁立法现代化的省份。在2018年5月17日，不列颠哥伦比亚通过《国际商事仲裁法修正案》对其《国际商事仲裁法》RBC1996，C.233进行修订。安大略省于2017年3月对其《国际商事仲裁法》进行修订。

《国际商事仲裁法修正案》请见：

https://www.canlii.org/en/bc/laws/stat/rsbc-1996-c-233/latest/rsbc-1996-c-233.html?autocompleteStr=international%20commer&autocompletePos=1

修正案巩固了不列颠哥伦比亚作为仲裁友好司法辖区的地位，并试图将不列颠哥伦比亚，尤其是温哥华，作为商事争议的最终仲裁地。该省是世界上25个已更新其立法的管辖区之一。尽管安大略省将《示范法》作为《国际商事仲裁法》的附件，但不列颠哥伦比亚将《示范法》的2006修正案连同其他发展一起纳入立法。当选择一个加拿大仲裁地时，注意不同省份之间国际商事仲裁立法的区别非常重要。

《国际商事仲裁法》修正案的主要特点

一、仲裁协议更宽泛的定义

根据《国际商事仲裁法》，仲裁协议的内容以任何形式记录，均为书面形式，无论该仲裁协议或合同是以口头方式，行为方式或其他方式订立。仲裁协议还可以通过电子通信的方式记录，如果其信息随后可以调取。

二、质疑仲裁员的更高要求

新的立法将使得质疑仲裁员变得更加困难。根据《示范法》，只有当存在对仲裁员的独立性和公正性产生合理怀疑的情况时，或者当仲裁员不具备当事人约定的资格时，才能对仲裁员提出异议。然而，《国际商事仲裁法》补充道：“只有当仲裁员在进行仲裁时存在真正的偏见危险，仲裁员的独立性和公正性才会遭受合理怀疑。”该门槛高于加拿大法律中传统的偏见标准，即是否存在合理的偏见。

三、默认仲裁是隐私且保密原则

除非当事人另有约定，否则不列颠哥伦比亚的仲裁将是隐私且保密。这包括仲裁协议、仲裁过程、证据以及与仲裁有关的非公众领域的文件和信息。

四、仲裁庭签发临时措施和初步命令的权力广泛而明确

根据《国际商事仲裁法》，仲裁庭有权签发临时措施和初步命令。《国际商事仲裁法》详细阐述了仲裁庭签发此种命令，以及承认与执行临时措施的权力和条件。《国际商事仲裁法》也为初步命令规定了具体的制度。

根据《国际商事仲裁法》，临时措施是一项保持或恢复原状，防止对仲裁程序的紧迫的伤害或者损害，保护财产或证据，或为与程序有关费用提供担保的措施。仲裁庭还可以签发初步命令，要求一方当事人不得阻止临时措施。

五、第三方资助不会阻碍判决的承认与执行。

关于承认与执行国际仲裁裁决，《国际商事仲裁法》确认为仲裁提供的第三方资助不违反不列颠哥伦比亚的公共政策。该条款能防止因一方当事人在仲裁中使用第三方资助导致裁决不能被强制执行的争论。

六、仲裁中当事人可以由外国律师代理

《国际商事仲裁法》确认在仲裁程序中当事人可以由其选择的任何人代理，包括（但不限于）外国律师。

【英文原文】

By Christina Doria                         

British Columbia is now the second Canadian province to modernize its international arbitration legislation by adopting the 2006 amendments to the UNCITRAL Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration (“Model Law”). On May 17, 2018 British Columbia amended its International Commercial Arbitration Act, RBC 1996, c.233 (“ICAA”) via the International Commercial A·rbitration Amendment Act. As we reported last year, Ontario updated its International Commercial Arbitration Act in March 2017 (cf. GAN: Ontario introduces new international arbitration legislation).

The amendments enhance British Columbia’s standing as an arbitration-friendly jurisdiction, and aim to position British Columbia, and Vancouver in particular, as an arbitration destination for commercial disputes. The province is one of 25 jurisdictions worldwide to have updated its legislation.[1] Whereas Ontario attached the Model Law as a schedule to the ICCA, British Columbia incorporated the 2006 Model Law amendments along with other developments into the legislation, highlighted below. When selecting a Canadian seat of arbitration it is important to take note of the differences in international commercial arbitration legislation among the various provinces.

Key Features of the Amended ICAA

A broader definition of “arbitration agreement”

Under the ICAA, an arbitration agreement is in writing if its content is recorded in any form, whether or not the arbitration agreement or contract has been concluded orally, by conduct or by other means. Also, an agreement to arbitrate may be recorded by electronic communication as long as it can be subsequently accessed.

A higher threshold to challenge an arbitrator

The new legislation will make it more difficult to challenge an arbitrator. An arbitrator may be challenged only if circumstances exist that give rise to justifiable doubts as to the arbitrator’s independence or impartiality, or the arbitrator does not possess the qualifications agreed to by the parties, which is language taken from the Model Law. However, the ICAA adds that “there are justifiable doubts as to the arbitrator’s independence or impartiality only if there is a real danger of bias on the part of the arbitrator in conducting the arbitration”. This is a higher threshold than the traditional test for bias under Canadian law, which is whether a reasonable apprehension of bias exists.

An arbitration that is private and confidential by default

Arbitrations seated in British Columbia will be private and confidential unless agreed otherwise by the parties. This includes the arbitration agreement, the proceedings, evidence, and documents and information relating to the arbitration that is not otherwise in the public domain.

A tribunal’s powers to grant interim measures and preliminary orders are broad and well articulated

A tribunal has broad powers under the ICAA to grant interim measures and preliminary orders. The ICAA details the powers and conditions to grant such orders as well as recognition and enforcement of interim measures. The ICAA also sets out a specific regime for preliminary orders.

Under the ICAA, an interim measure is any temporary measure that maintains or restores the status quo, prevents imminent harm or prejudice to the arbitral process, preserves assets or evidence, or provides security for costs in connection with the proceedings. A tribunal can also issue preliminary orders directing a party not to frustrate the purpose of the interim measure requested.

Third party funding won’t hinder recognition and enforcement of an award

With respect to recognizing and enforcing an international arbitration award, the ICAA confirms that third party funding for an arbitration is not contrary to the public policy in British Columbia. That provision should prevent any argument that an award should not be enforced because a party used third party funding in the arbitration.

Parties may be represented in an arbitration by foreign counsel

The ICAA confirms that a party may be represented in arbitral proceedings by any person of that party’s choice, including (but not limited to) a legal practitioner from another state. 

来源: 临时仲裁ADA 不代表本会意见