Existing Dilemmas and Solutions for Joining Third Parties in Arbitration Law
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.54097/my7xj808Keywords:
Arbitration Law, Third Party Arbitration, Voluntary ArbitrationAbstract
This study focuses on the institutional dilemma of adding a third party in arbitration law and its solution path. By analyzing the binary opposition between the scope of effectiveness of arbitration agreements and the principle of one-time dispute resolution, it reveals the problem of judicial resource waste caused by legislative gaps. Research has found that there is a fundamental conflict between the principle of voluntary arbitration and third-party participation, and the limitations of the scope of effectiveness of arbitration agreements further exacerbate procedural barriers. From the analysis of the causes, the deficiencies at the legislative level and the differentiated treatment in judicial practice jointly constitute the root cause of the institutional dilemma, and the differences in rules of different arbitration institutions lead to inconsistent application standards. To solve this dilemma, this study proposes to clarify the conditions for third-party participation through legislation, optimize the special circumstances participation mechanism in arbitration rules, and construct a third-party institutional framework that balances party autonomy and procedural efficiency, in order to achieve a balance between fairness and economy in the arbitration system.
Downloads
References
[1] Zhao, X. H., & Li, Z. J. (2003). Internal conflict and checks and balances of the system of third parties without independent claims. Modern Jurisprudence, (6), 49–53.
[2] Du, H. F. (2025). The inclusiveness, openness and adaptability that arbitration law should have. Political and Legal Forum, 43(1), 71–80.
[3] Song, L. B. (2025). Analysis of the underlying logic of judicial support for arbitration. Political and Legal Forum, 43(1), 81–88.
[4] Hu, X. J. (2018). On the distinction between joint litigation and the system of third-party participation in litigation. Global Legal Review, 40(1), 26–38.
[5] Park, S. S., & Zhang, Z. H. (2020). Research on the system of third-party revocation of arbitral awards. Academic Exchange, (6), 75–88.
[6] Feng, S. (2025). Contractual review and adjustment of China's arbitration system. Jurisprudence, (9), 179–192.
[7] Liu, C. M. (1998). Legal analysis of adding third parties to arbitral tribunals. People's Justice, (9).
[8] Liu, X. H. (2025). Jurisprudential basis and practical space of local arbitration legislation. Political and Legal Forum, 43(1), 60–70.
[9] Yang, W. G. (2015). On the reconstruction of the system of remedies for the rights and interests of third parties in civil litigation - focusing on the standing of the plaintiff in the action of revocation by an outside third party. Journal of Hainan University (Humanities and Social Sciences Edition), 33(3), 117–123.
[10] Shi, H. (2026). Background, ideas and main contents of the revision of the Arbitration Law. China Law Review, (1), 17–30.
[11] Zhang, J. Y. (2025). Obstacles and removal of the participation of third parties with independent claims. Journal of Xinyu University, 30(3), 29–38.
[12] Wu, A. B. (2026). On the procedural boundaries of the court's power to notify third parties to participate in the litigation. Journal of Law, 47(1), 57–69.
[13] Liu, C. M. (1998). An exploration of whether third parties can be added in arbitration cases. Shandong Trial, (6), 31–32.
[14] Anonymous. (2026). Diversified resolution of disputes. China Law Review, (1), 16.
[15] Zhao, Y. (2018). A study on the objection to jurisdiction in foreign-related joint tort disputes involving third parties. Journal of Southwest University of Political Science and Law, 20(5), 22–31.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Academic Journal of Management and Social Sciences
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
