与美国律师对话在线调解　[www.dffy.com]

　　内容说明：以下为阿里巴巴社区在线调解论坛斑竹lawyergao与美国律师David沟通交流的对话内容， David针对在线调解谈了自己的观点，并给出了建设性的发展建议，现整理出来供大家浏览参考。同时感谢西北签证中心网友的跟帖翻译。

　　Do you expect the users will be mostly Chinese companies?

　　你是否期待所有用户都是中国的企业？

　　Some nation s laws must apply That s not always easy, deciding which country s laws apply . Often, the contract says

　　有些国家的法律必须适用。决定哪个国家的法律适用，这通常不是很容易。通常是按照合同的约定

　　Here is an outline of a plan that you might want to present as a suggestion:

　　这是一个你可能想要的建议概述：

　　

　　（David）　　　　　　　　　　　　（高丙田）

　　I think you need two types of technology. Both parties should submit a completed questionaire. Then each side submits a story about what happened, and what the dispute is about. Then the mediator considers the matter and sends each side the questionaire and story received from the other side. Then each side can submit a response. Then the mediator schedules an online chat meeting to discuss the matter. The chat is a different technolgy from the exchange of documents. also in a website in an English version for it

　　我认为你们需要两方面的技术支持。双方当事人都应提交一份完整的问卷表，然后每一方提交一份事实发生的过程详述，以及关于什么具体问题的纠纷。调解方结合事实，向每一方发送问卷表和收到的各自提交的事件经过。之后双方提交回复。调解方安排一次在线会议以双方共同讨论事件。聊天式的在线会议不同于文件互换的技术方式，为此也需要同时有个英文版本的站点。

　　Sometimes all you can offer is that the mediator will describe the law and the result that the court probably will decide. That should influence the weaker party to agree to settlement.

　　有时你们能做的就是调解员给双方描述相关法律条文以及如果诉诸法律可能带来的后果，这将影响或促使过错方接受调解。

　　Sometimes the mediator won t know the law because it might be Belgium law or Argentina law, and the mediator doesn t know. So the mdiator describes what would be normal law. And the mediation proceeds on that basis.

　　有时调解方不了解双方国家的法律，因为可能是比利时法律或阿根廷法律，调解方并不了解。调解方应该描述什么法律规范应是普遍遵守的。调解应在此基础上进行。

　　The mediator must know a lot about law and how courts work. It is not enough that the mediator knows about integrity and common sense and usual business practices.

　　调解方必须多掌握法律知识和法庭是如何运作的。调解人员仅仅了解诚信、常识和通常的商业实践是不够的。

　　The parties think they know all about integrity and common sense and business practices. They won t listen regarding those things. The law is the area of exertise that the mediator maybe bring to the table, that will be listened to. Otherwise, there is no point to mediation.

　　当事双方认为他们都很了解诚信、常识和商业实践。他们不会听取这些方面。法律是调解员可以提到谈判桌上施压的因素，这一点是必须遵从的。否则，就没有调解的前提。

　　If it is customary in China for mediation to consist of an attempt to negotiate a fair compromise, based on integrity and common sense and usual business practices, then Alibaba should use that method for all disputes between Chinese companies.

　　基于诚信、良知和通常的商业惯例，在中国如果调解，包括尝试公平谈判和解成为习惯，那么阿里巴巴就应使用这样的调解方式去解决中国企业之间的交易纠纷。

　　But if the dispute is between a Norwegian and a Mexican, the intgegrity & common sense negotiation won t be what the parties expect. And it won t be what the respect. They need law, and a prediction about what will happen if they don t settle.

你的位置：首页 >> 司法实践 >> 借鉴 >> 正文　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　双击自动滚屏