The agent of an arbitration case is not necessarily a lawyer, but also a close relative. Lawyers, close relatives, and community recommendations are all acceptable. A complete labor dispute case needs to go through arbitration, first instance, second instance and execution procedures. At all stages, the parties must file a case, get a notice, appear in court and get a judgment document. Individuals who have no time or other inconvenient circumstances may entrust a lawyer to handle it on their behalf.
Legal objectivity: On September 8, 2065438, the Ministry of Justice promulgated the revised Administrative Measures for Lawyers' Practice (hereinafter referred to as the Administrative Measures). Article 28 of the Administrative Measures stipulates that lawyers are prohibited from "engaging in legal affairs with conflicts of interest in cases where they are arbitrators". Article 62 stipulates: "These Measures shall be implemented as of 20 16 1 1. The regulations and normative documents formulated by the Ministry of Justice on the management of lawyers' practice are in conflict with these measures, and these measures shall prevail. "
We believe that according to the provisions of Articles 7 and 28 of the Administrative Measures and the principle that the new law is superior to the old law, it no longer constitutes a "conflict of interest" prohibited by the Lawyers Law. However, in judicial practice, because the Punishment Measures and Management Measures are both departmental regulations issued by the Ministry of Justice, and there is no relevant explanatory document to clarify the relationship between them, there are differences in their application in judicial practice in China.
(20 17) in case su 02 93, the applicant violated the provisions of article 7 of the punishment measures on the grounds that three arbitrators and Hua Jiangyan were both arbitrators and lawyers of Wuxi arbitration commission, which was one of the reasons for applying for not enforcing the arbitral award involved. Jiangsu Wuxi Intermediate People's Court held that the third paragraph of Article 28 of the Measures for the Administration of Lawyers' Practice (OrderNo. 134 of the Ministry of Justice) stipulates that "a lawyer shall not represent other lawyers in his law firm as arbitrators. Lawyers who have served as arbitrators or are serving as arbitrators shall not undertake legal affairs that have conflicts of interest with cases in which they have served as arbitrators. Article 62 stipulates that "These Measures shall come into force as of 2011day. The regulations and normative documents formulated by the Ministry of Justice on the management of lawyers' practice are in conflict with these measures, and these measures shall prevail. "Therefore, there is no situation in which members of the arbitral tribunal and litigation agents involved in the case should withdraw according to law and arbitration rules."
(20 17) in the civil ruling No.29 of Anhui 06 Minte, the applicant Changyuan Gangue Company held that the respondent's entrusted agent Jiang and three arbitrators of the arbitration tribunal were all arbitrators of Huaibei Arbitration Commission, and the Intermediate People's Court of Huaibei City, Anhui Province determined that "if the arbitration law and related laws do not stipulate that the party's agent in an arbitration case is an arbitrator of the arbitration commission, the arbitrator of the arbitration tribunal should withdraw", and further pointed out that the applicant's entrusted agent should be withdrawn.
Some courts still insist that an arbitrator, as an agent of his arbitration commission under the Punishment Measures, constitutes a conflict of interest and should be avoided. In the case of (20 17) Anhui 16 Minte No.59, the applicant claimed that the respondent's agent was an arbitrator of Bozhou Arbitration Commission, and he was a colleague of three arbitrators in this case, so he should withdraw without withdrawing, which constituted a violation of the arbitration procedure and applied for revocation of the arbitration award involved. Bozhou Intermediate People's Court held that "in this case, the agent ad litem of Wanfo Company, the applicant for arbitration and the three arbitrators who formed the arbitration tribunal are all arbitrators of Bozhou Arbitration Commission. Lawyers are both arbitration agents and arbitrators of arbitration institutions. This contradictory dual identity may affect the justice of the case and make the parties have reasonable doubts about the fairness and authority of the arbitral award. " Finally, according to Article 7 of the Punishment Measures, the court held that the respondent's agent had a relationship with three arbitrators that might affect fair arbitration, and the arbitrators should withdraw, which constituted an illegal arbitration procedure and revoked the arbitral award involved.