我国立法规定债权人以诉讼方式行使代位权,但是由于存在债权人与债务人、债务人与次债务人、债权人与次债务人三种交互错杂的民事法律关系,因此而产生各方利益权衡的难题。原《合同法司法解释(一)》目前已经废止,且现行的《民事诉讼法》及相关司法解释中并未对代位权诉讼的管辖作出规定,在实践中,代位权诉讼的管辖应当如何确定,代位权特殊地域管辖与仲裁管辖应当如何协调适用存在认识分歧。虽然代位权纠纷是一种常见的争议类型,但司法实践是一个循序渐进的过程,有必要对基于个案的分散性规则进行归纳整合,以更好地服务于代位权与仲裁制度的理论发展与规则适用。基于此,本文将近几年司法实践中的代位权管辖纠纷案例以及相关学术观点进行整合,探析化解仲裁协议与代位权行使之间的冲突的有效路径,以期能促进司法实务界对该问题进一步统一认识,进而减少因程序问题理解不一致导致的司法资源浪费。China’s legislation provides that the creditor to litigation to exercise subrogation, but due to the existence of the creditor and the debtor, the debtor and the relative, the creditor and the relative of the three kinds of interlocking civil legal relations, and therefore the interests of all parties to produce the problem of weighing. The original “contract law judicial interpretation (a)” has been repealed, and the current “civil procedure law” and the relevant judicial interpretation of the subrogation lawsuit did not make provisions of jurisdiction, in practice, subrogation lawsuit jurisdiction should be how to determine the subrogation of special territorial jurisdiction and arbitration jurisdiction should be coordinated with the application of the existence of differences in understanding. This paper will judicially practice cases and related academic views on subrogation litigation jurisdiction, with a view to promote the ju
