DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

A Study on Interim Measures of Arbitration - the Korea domestic perspective -

중재에서의 임시적처분에 대한 연구 - 국내 중재를 중심으로 -

  • Received : 2020.04.27
  • Accepted : 2020.05.31
  • Published : 2020.06.30

Abstract

If the interim disposition of the Arbitration Tribunal is not immediately enforceable, it will only give pressure to the other party concerned and the arbitration could work against him if the other party fails to implement it. If enforcement is impossible, the disposition will have no practical effect or practical benefit. In addition, if a system is contrary to its unique characteristics or nature, it will not function as a system or it will become an unnecessary decoration. There is no room for argument that the above provisions are wrong or misinterpreted if the temporary disposition in arbitration cannot be characterized by its characteristics, such as its provisionality, urgency, incidentality, or invasibility. As attracting international arbitration cases can create enormous added value for the national economy, countries are scrambling to create a mediating-friendly legal environment in their countries, and Korea has been more active in arbitration than in the past. Despite various efforts, however, attracting international arbitration cases is still a long way off. Therefore, Korea should create a mediating-friendly, legal environment to attract arbitration cases. There are many reasons why arbitration is activated internationally, but the most important of them is that it is easier to approve and execute. The use of the approval and execution of heavy court is, in turn, the most important requirement of a mediating-friendly environment. It is natural that temporary dispositions made in arbitration should be as easy to approve and enforce as in the case of arbitration. In addition, it is natural for the parties to consider the use of approval and execution when deciding where to mediate or when applying for arbitration; thus, the degree of ease of execution, along with the procedural use of arbitration or provisional disposition, will be a measure of the likelihood of hosting international arbitration cases, as well as the activation of arbitration.

Keywords

References

  1. 김갑유, 중재실무강의, 박영사, 2012.
  2. 김갑유, 임수현, 김홍중, 김준우 외, "중재실무강의", 2016. 9.
  3. 목영준, 상사중재법, 박영사, 2011.
  4. 석광현, 국제민사소송법: 국제사법(절차편), 박영사, 2012.
  5. 이시윤, 신민사집행법, 제6보정판, 박영사, 2014.
  6. 최안식, 민사집행법, 어화, 2006. 3.
  7. 강태훈, "중재법 개정안 등에 관한 토론문", 중재제도 선진화 및 중재산업 활성화를 위한 중재법 및 중재산업 진흥에 관한 법률 제.개정 공청회 자료집 2015. 10.
  8. 김상찬, "ICSID 중재판정 취소제도", 중재연구 제25권제4호, 한국중재학회, 2015. 6. 2.
  9. 김영주, "ASEAN 국가들의 외국중재판정에 관한 승인 및 집행," 중재연구 제25권제4호, 한국중재학회, 2015. 6.
  10. 김용진, "중재와 법원 사이의 역할분담과 절차협력 관계(국제적 중재합의의 효력에 관한 다툼과 중재합의관철 방안을 중심으로)", 중재연구 제27권제1호, 한국중재학회, 2017. 3.
  11. 노태악, "UNCITRAL 모델중재법 및 중재규칙 개정에 따른 국내법 개정의 필요성 검토", 국제사법연구, 제16호, 한국국제사법학회, 2010. 12.
  12. 박준선, "상사중재 활성화를 위한 중재판정부의 임시적 처분제도의 개선" 중재연구 제26권 2호, 한국중재학회, 2016. 6. https://doi.org/10.16998/JAS.2016.26.2.45
  13. 성준호, "프랜차이즈 분쟁계약상 사전중재합의에 관한 법리적 검토", 중재연구 제29권 제1호, 2019. 3.
  14. 성준호, "독일민사소송법상 외국중재판정의 승인 및 집행", 중재연구, 제29권 제2호, 한국중재학회, 2019. 6.
  15. 윤진기, "2016년 개정 중재법의 중재판정 집행에 관한 문제점", 중재연구 제26권 제4호, 한국중재학회, 2016. 12. https://doi.org/10.16998/JAS.2016.26.4.43
  16. 임동진, "대안적갈등해결방식(ADR)제도의 운영실태 및 개선방안 연구", KIPA 연구보고서 2012-39, 한국행정연구원.
  17. 전우정, "중국 민사소송제도의 특색과 중재절차에서의 임시적처분 및 중재판정의 집행", 중재연구 제29건 제2호, 2019. 6.
  18. 정선주, "중재절차에서 임시적 처분제도의 개선방안", 법무부 연구용역 보고서, 2012. 11.
  19. 정선주,"중재법 개정의 방향과 주요 내용", 고려법학, 제69호, 고려대학교 법학연구원, 2013. 6.
  20. 정선주, "2016년 개정 중재법 소고", 민사소송, 제21권 제1호(2017. 5.)
  21. 하충룡, "중재합의의 당사자자치에 관한 미국계약법상 해석", 중재연구, 제29권 제2호, 2019. 6.
  22. Andy Hewitt, Construction Claims & Responses(effective writing & presentation), Wiley Blackwell. 6. 2015.
  23. Golden, Jeffrey and Lamm, Carolyn, International Financial Disputes: Arbitration and Mediation, Oxford University Press, 2015.
  24. Harvard Law School, "Mediation Secrets for Better Business Negotiations: Top Techniques from Mediation Training Experts - 2008 - 2018 Program on Negotiation at Harvard Law School", 6. 2018.
  25. Maller et.al. Business Law, McGraw-Hill, 13th ed, 2007.
  26. Musielak, Hans-Joachim/Voit, Wolfgang, Zivilprozessordnung, 14. Auflage, Verlag Vahlen, 2017.
  27. Rude v. NUCO Edn. corp., slip Copy, 2011 WL 6931516.
  28. Vorwerk, Volkert/Wolf, Christian, Beck'scher Online-Kommentar ZPO, 24. Edition, 2017.
  29. William Henry Fisher MSc, Dip. Surv (building), Dip. Arb. FRICS (retired), FCIArb(retired). "The use of arbitration in the construction industry in England and Wales: an evaluation of its continuing role following the Arbitration Act 1996" A thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements of the University of Wolverhampton for the degree of Doctor of philosophy (PhD), NOVEMBER 2017.