最高人民法院于2022年12月27日和2022年12月30日分别发布了和最高法指导性案例，其中第36批共6件，第37批共10件。“北大法宝”专业翻译团队已于近日完成翻译工作，英文译本现已上线北大法宝·英文译本库。欢迎查阅！
来源 | 北大法宝法律法规库
北大法宝英文译本库
[CLI Code] CLI.3.5146771(EN)
目 录
指导案例196号
运裕有限公司与深圳市中苑城商业投资控股有限公司申请确认仲裁协议效力案
Luck Treat Limited v. Shenzhen Zhongyuancheng Commercial Investment Holdings Co., Ltd. (application for confirmation of the validity of an arbitration agreement)
指导案例197号
深圳市实正共盈投资控股有限公司与深圳市交通运输局申请确认仲裁协议效力案
Shenzhen Shizheng Gongying Investment Holdings Co., Ltd. v. Bureau of Transport of Shenzhen City (application for confirmation of the validity of an arbitration agreement)
指导案例198号
中国工商银行股份有限公司岳阳分行与刘友良申请撤销仲裁裁决案
Yueyang Branch of Industrial and Commercial Bank of China v. Liu Youliang (application for setting aside an arbitral award)
指导案例199号
高哲宇与深圳市云丝路创新发展基金企业、李斌申请撤销仲裁裁决案
Gao Zheyu v. Shenzhen Cloud Silk Road Innovation and Development Fund Enterprise and Li Bin (application for setting aside an arbitral award)
指导案例200号
斯万斯克蜂蜜加工公司申请承认和执行外国仲裁裁决案
Svensk Honungsförädling AB's Application for Recognition and Enforcement of a Foreign Arbitral Award
指导案例201号
德拉甘·可可托维奇诉上海恩渥餐饮管理有限公司、吕恩劳务合同纠纷案
Dragan Kokotovic v. Shanghai Enwo Catering Management Co., Ltd. and Lu En (labor service contract dispute)
Notice by the Supreme People's Court of Issuing the Thirty-Sixth Group of Guiding Cases
指导案例196号 (Guiding Case No. 196)
运裕有限公司与深圳市中苑城商业投资控股有限公司申请确认仲裁协议效力案
Luck Treat Limited v. Shenzhen Zhongyuancheng Commercial Investment Holdings Co., Ltd. (application for confirmation of the validity of an arbitration agreement)
关键词 [Keywords]
民事/申请确认仲裁协议效力/仲裁条款成立
civil, application for confirmation of the validity of an arbitration agreement, establishment of an arbitration clause
裁判要点 [Key Points of Judgment]
1.当事人以仲裁条款未成立为由请求确认仲裁协议不存在的，人民法院应当按照申请确认仲裁协议效力案件予以审查。
1.Where a party requests confirmation of the absence of an arbitration agreement on the grounds that an arbitration clause has not been established, the people's court shall examine the request as a case involving an application for confirmation of the validity of an arbitration agreement.
2.仲裁条款独立存在，其成立、效力与合同其他条款是独立、可分的。当事人在订立合同时对仲裁条款进行磋商并就提交仲裁达成合意的，合同成立与否不影响仲裁条款的成立、效力。
2.An arbitration clause exists independently, and its establishment and validity are independent and severable from the other clauses of a contract. If the parties negotiate an arbitration clause and reach an agreement on submission to arbitration when concluding the contract, whether the contract is established or not does not affect the establishment and validity of the arbitration clause.
指导案例201号 (Guiding Case No. 201)
德拉甘·可可托维奇诉上海恩渥餐饮管理有限公司、吕恩劳务合同纠纷案
Dragan Kokotovic v. Shanghai Enwo Catering Management Co., Ltd. and Lu En (labor service contract dispute)
关键词 [Keywords]
民事/劳务合同/《承认及执行外国仲裁裁决公约》/国际单项体育组织/仲裁协议效力
civil, labor service contract, Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards, international sports federation, validity of an arbitration agreement
裁判要点 [Key Points of Judgment]
1.国际单项体育组织内部纠纷解决机构作出的纠纷处理决定不属于《承认及执行外国仲裁裁决公约》项下的外国仲裁裁决。
1.A dispute settlement decision made by the dispute resolution agency of an international sports federation is not a foreign arbitral award under the Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards.
2. 当事人约定，发生纠纷后提交国际单项体育组织解决，如果国际单项体育组织没有管辖权则提交国际体育仲裁院仲裁，该约定不存在准据法规定的无效情形的，应认定该约定有效。国际单项体育组织实际行使了管辖权，涉案争议不符合当事人约定的提起仲裁条件的，人民法院对涉案争议依法享有司法管辖权。
2. If the parties agree to submit a dispute an international sports federation for resolution, or submit it to the Court of Arbitration for Sport for arbitration, if the international sports federation lacks jurisdiction, the agreement shall be determined to be valid, unless the agreement falls under circumstances as specified by the applicable law under which the agreement is invalid. If the international sports federation has actually exercised jurisdiction, and the dispute involved in this case does not meet the conditions for submission to arbitration as agreed by the parties, the people's court shall have judicial jurisdiction over the dispute involved in this case in accordance with the law.
[CLI Code] CLI.3.5149477(EN)
目录
指导案例202号
武汉卓航江海贸易有限公司、向阳等12人污染环境刑事附带民事公益诉讼案
People v. Wuhan Zhuohang Jianghai Trading Co., Ltd. and 12 Individuals Including Xiang Yang ( civil public interest litigation)
指导案例203号
左勇、徐鹤污染环境刑事附带民事公益诉讼案
People v. Zuo Yong and Xu He (criminal case of environmental pollution with incidental civil public interest litigation)
指导案例204号
重庆市人民检察院第五分院诉重庆瑜煌电力设备制造有限公司等环境污染民事公益诉讼案
Fifth Branch of the People's Procuratorate of Chongqing Municipality v. Chongqing Yuhuang Electrical Equipment Manufacturing Co., Ltd. et al. (civil public interest litigation for environmental pollution)
指导案例205号
上海市人民检察院第三分院诉郎溪华远固体废物处置有限公司、宁波高新区米泰贸易有限公司、黄德庭、薛强环境污染民事公益诉讼案
Third Branch of the People's Procuratorate of Shanghai Municipality v. Langxi Huayuan Solid Waste Disposal Co., Ltd., Ningbo High-tech Zone Mitai Trading Co., Ltd., Huang Deting, and Xue Qiang (civil public interest litigation for environmental pollution)
指导案例206号
北京市人民检察院第四分院诉朱清良、朱清涛环境污染民事公益诉讼案
Fourth Branch of the People's Procuratorate of Beijing Municipaliy v. Zhu Qingliang and Zhu Qingtao (civil public interest litigation for environmental pollution)
指导案例207号
江苏省南京市人民检察院诉王玉林生态破坏民事公益诉讼案
People's Procuratorate of Nanjing City, Jiangsu Province v. Wang Yulin (civil public interest litigation for ecological damage)
指导案例208号
江西省上饶市人民检察院诉张永明、张鹭、毛伟明生态破坏民事公益诉讼案
People's Procuratorate of Shangrao City, Jiangxi Province v. Zhang Yongming, Zhang Lu, and Mao Weiming (civil public interest litigation for ecological damage)
指导案例209号
浙江省遂昌县人民检察院诉叶继成生态破坏民事公益诉讼案
People's Procuratorate of Suichang County, Zhejiang Province v. Ye Jicheng (civil public interest litigation for ecological damage)
指导案例210号
九江市人民政府诉江西正鹏环保科技有限公司、杭州连新建材有限公司、李德等生态环境损害赔偿诉讼案
People's Government of Jiujiang City v. Jiangxi Zhengpeng Environmental Protection Technology Co., Ltd., Hangzhou Lianxin Building Materials Co., Ltd., Li De, et al. (action for eco-environmental damages)
指导案例211号
铜仁市万山区人民检察院诉铜仁市万山区林业局不履行林业行政管理职责行政公益诉讼案
People's Procuratorate of Wanshan District of Tongren City v. Forestry Bureau of Wanshan District of Tongren City (administrative public interest litigation for non-performance of forestry administrative duty)
Notice by the Supreme People's Court of Issuing the Thirty-Seventh Group of Guiding Cases
指导案例202号 (Guiding Case No.202)
武汉卓航江海贸易有限公司、向阳等12人污染环境刑事附带民事公益诉讼案
People v. Wuhan Zhuohang Jianghai Trading Co., Ltd. and 12 Individuals Including Xiang Yang ( civil public interest litigation)
关键词 [Keywords]
刑事/刑事附带民事公益诉讼/船舶偷排含油污水/损害认定/污染物性质鉴定
criminal, civil public interest litigation incidental to criminal proceedings, unauthorized discharge of oily wastewater from a ship, determination of damage, identification of the nature of pollutants
裁判要点 [Key Points of Judgment]
1.船舶偷排含油污水案件中，人民法院可以根据船舶航行轨迹、污染防治设施运行状况、污染物处置去向，结合被告人供述、证人证言、专家意见等证据对违法排放污染物的行为及其造成的损害作出认定。
1.In a case involving unauthorized discharge of oily wastewater from a ship, the people's court may determine the illegal discharge of pollutants and the resultant damage based on the ship's voyage, the operating status of pollution prevention and control facilities, and the method of pollutant disposal, in light of evidence such as defendant's confessions, witness testimony, and expert opinions.
2. 认定船舶偷排的含油污水是否属于有毒物质时，由于客观原因无法取样的，可以依据来源相同、性质稳定的舱底残留污水进行污染物性质鉴定。
2. When determining whether the oily wastewater discharged from the ship without authorization is a toxic substance, if it is impossible to sample due to objective reasons, the nature of the pollutants may be identified based on the residual bilge wastewater from the same source and of a stable nature.
指导案例211号 (Guiding Case No.211)
铜仁市万山区人民检察院诉铜仁市万山区林业局不履行林业行政管理职责行政公益诉讼案
People's Procuratorate of Wanshan District of Tongren City v. Forestry Bureau of Wanshan District of Tongren City (administrative public interest litigation for non-performance of forestry administrative duty)
关键词 [Keywords]
行政/行政公益诉讼/林业行政管理/行政处罚与刑罚衔接/特殊功能区环境修复
administration, administrative public interest litigation, forestry administration, connection between administrative and criminal penalties, environmental repair of special functional areas
裁判要点 [Key Points of Judgment]
1.违法行为人的同一行为既违反行政法应受行政处罚，又触犯刑法应受刑罚处罚的情形下，行政机关在将案件移送公安机关时不应因案件移送而撤销已经作出的行政处罚。对刑事判决未涉及的行政处罚事项，行政机关在刑事判决生效后作出行政处罚决定的，人民法院应予支持。
1.Where an act of a violator is subject to both administrative and criminal penalties for violating both administrative laws and the Criminal Law, the administrative authority, when transferring the case to the public security authority, shall not revoke administrative penalties already imposed because of such transfer. If the administrative authority makes an administrative penalty decision with respect to administrative penalty matters not involved in a criminal judgment after the criminal judgment takes effect, the people's court shall uphold such decision.
2.违法行为人在刑事判决中未承担生态环境修复责任的，林业等行政主管部门应当及时责令其依法履行修复义务，若违法行为人不履行或者不完全履行时应组织代为履行。林业等行政主管部门未履行法定生态修复监督管理职责，行政公益诉讼起诉人请求其依法履职的，人民法院应予支持。
2. If a violator is not held liable for eco-environmental repair by the criminal judgment, forestry and other administrative authorities shall order the violator in a timely manner to perform the repair obligation in accordance with the law, or if the violator fails to perform or fails to fully perform such obligation, organize performance in place of the violator. If forestry and other administrative authorities fail to perform their statutory duties of supervision and administration of ecological repair, and the plaintiff in administrative public interest litigation requests them to perform the duties in accordance with the law, the people's courts shall uphold such request.
3.特殊功能区生态环境被破坏，原则上应当原地修复。修复义务人或者代履行人主张异地修复，但不能证明原地修复已不可能或者没有必要的，人民法院不予支持。
3. If the eco-environment of a special functional area is damaged, repair shall be made on site in principle. Where a person with repair obligations, or a person performing in place of him or her, argues for off-site repair, without proving the impossibility or unnecessity of on-site repair, the people's court shall not uphold such argument.
因篇幅所限，本文截取部分内容推送给大家，欢迎点击文末“阅读原文”进入“北大法宝·英文译本库”查看完整中英文对照版。
北京北大英华
科技有限公司
PKULaw
Chinalawinfo
PKULaw
Chinalawinfo
PKULaw
Chinalawinfo
北大法宝·英文译本库
北大法宝·英文译本库，是集中国法律法规、司法案例、法学期刊、国际条约、法律新闻等重要信息于一体，高效检索、及时更新的英文法律信息系统。由“北大法宝”翻译中心人工翻译，多重校对，更符合中文原意。翻译范围覆盖法律、行政法规、司法解释、部门规章及地方性法规，最高人民法院公报案例、指导性案例、典型案例以及国务院、各部委、各地方发布的具有涉外因素的规范性文件等等。
北大法宝·英文译本库：
https://www.pkulaw.com/english
责任编辑 | 金梦洋
审核人员 | 刘沭含 曲鹏翔
本文声明 | 本文章仅限学习交流使用，如遇侵权，我们会及时删除。本文章不代表北大法律信息网（北大法宝）和北京北大英华科技有限公司的法律意见或对相关法规/案件/事件等的解读。
热门跟贴