• 월간 기계설비
• /
• no.7 s.192
• /
• pp.44-49
• /
• 2006

시공을 하다가 손해를 보았는데도 발주자 혹은 원도급업체에서 인정을 안해준다면 어떻게 해야 할까? “소송을 할까?”, “다음 공사는 어떻게 해. 그냥 손해보고 말지 뭐”, “아니야 그냥 넘어가기에는 너무 억울해” 설비건설업을 하다보면 누구나 한번쯤 이런 경험이 있었을 것이다. 이럴 경우 공정거래위원회에 문의 하거나 건설하도급분쟁조정협의회에 문의하다가 정 안될 경우 소송에 돌입한다. 소송의 경우 대법원의 최종 판결이 나기까지 2~3년은 고스란히 걸림은 물론 소송비용도 만만치 않다. 이렇게 기간이 길지 않고 가격도 저렴하면서 해결가능한 방법은 없을까? 물론 있다. 바로 대한상사중재원(원장 박삼규)이다. 올해로 창립 40주년을 맞은 대한상사중재원은 상거래 상의 분쟁이 일어날 경우 중재(仲裁)를 함으로써 법률적인 효력을 갖는다. 또한 전문가에 의한 정확한 판결과 함께 약 6개월 정도의 기간으로 신속한 처리를 장점으로 꼽는다. 중재판결(仲裁判決)은 법원의 확정판결과 동일한 효력을 가진다. 또한 이를 이행하지 않을 경우 법원의 집행판결로 강제집행이 가 능하다. 그러나 계약서 체결시“중재조항”을 삽입해 두어야 중재에 의한 해결을 하 수 있다. 따라서 설비건설업계도 앞으로 원∙하도급 계약체결 시 중재조항을 넣어두는 것을 명심해야 한다. 본지는 이번 호에 대한상사중재원의 중재에 대하여 게재하고, 8월호에는 건설하도급분쟁조정협의회를, 9월호에는 공정거래위원회를 게재할 계획이다.

• Construction Engineering and Management
• /
• v.3 no.1 s.9
• /
• pp.9-13
• /
• 2002

• 월간 기계설비
• /
• s.120
• /
• pp.17-17
• /
• 2000

• Journal of the Korea Institute of Building Construction
• /
• v.10 no.4
• /
• pp.21-29
• /
• 2010

International construction contractors are often faced with the situation of working in an unfamiliar construction environment. Under FIDIC rules, the contractor has the right to make a claim requesting the consulting engineer for an adjustment to the contract price or the time for completion when a part or parts of the works have changed, or in the event of unforeseeable conditions. Contractors generally have more access to the costs and time implications of such a change or unforeseeable conditions than the consulting engineer or outside neutrals. Due to such an asymmetry of information, the contractor may be motivated to dispute frivolous claims of less merit, expecting erroneous judgments by the consulting engineer or the neutrals. In this paper, a claiming behavior model is presented by using game theory and experience data to study the manner in which frivolous claims develop into disputes. The model also analyzes the impacts of DAB/DRB upon the frivolous claims.

• Construction Engineering and Management
• /
• v.3 no.1 s.9
• /
• pp.19-26
• /
• 2002

• Proceedings of the Korean Institute Of Construction Engineering and Management
• /
• autumn
• /
• pp.300-305
• /
• 2002

The construction project is a complex undertaking involving multiple participants. Conflicts are inherently natural in the construction projects and subsequently, a success of projects mainly depends on how well to cope with the conflicts. In the past, courts usually took the position that the professional's exposure in damages for negligent performance of any of his/her duties would not extend to strangers to the contractual arrangement. However, courts today generally reject that rationale which was earlier in vogue and protect architects, engineers, and contractors from being liable to third parties. It means that the lack of privity of contract could rarely protect a profession in a suit alleging the negligence or professional malpractice in preparing plans or specifications. The main goal of this paper is to enhance the understanding of the legal aspect of privity and to provide the trend of no-privity disputes through the analysis of lawsuit cases during the last 40 years. On the base of the analysis, importance of the third relationship and the liability in construction disputes is presented.

• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.21 no.1
• /
• pp.87-107
• /
• 2011

There are two methods to resolve conflicts related to constructions which are through lawsuits and ADR (Alternative Dispute Resolution) just like any other conflicts. Along with the special characteristics pertaining to the conflicts related to constructions, the advantages that ADR is in possession of such as its cost, duration and professionalism, resolving conflicts through ADR has been considered to be more logical than any other options recently. In Korea's case at present, the resolution of conflicts regarding constructions through ADR is mostly dependent on administrative mediation or through arbitration. However, in the case of the administrative mediation, its usage rate is very low due to problems caused by problems in its running and effectiveness. In the case of arbitration, the services of the Korean Commercial Arbitration Board is comparatively used more but because of the fact that arbitration relies on a single trial system and the fact that its executive powers while having the same effectiveness as the final ruling does not get acknowledged leads to the phenomena of avoiding its usage. In addition, in relation to the selective arbitration clause, the problem of effectiveness of the arbitrative agreement is becoming a hindrance to the activation and promotion of the arbitration process. Furthermore, in the case where the ordering body is the government, the public servant involved in the case avoiding the arbitration process because of concerns of being penalized by the internal and external audit within the institution is becoming a problem as well. These problems are not only limited to conflicts regarding constructions and there needs to be actions taken to promote the activation of ADR by enacting a basic law. The more important issue at hand however is offering a resolution measure that would be the most appropriate for users and this could probably be done only through actions such as implementing the American partnering system or the dispute adjudication board system so that they can supervise the resolution of conflicts through mediation, arbitration, and assistance as well as offering consultations regarding conflicts related to constructions.

• 월간 기계설비
• /
• no.9 s.194
• /
• pp.59-63
• /
• 2006

시공을 하다가 손해를 보았는데도 발주자 혹은 원도급업체에서 인정을 안해준다면 어떻게 해야 할까? "소송을 할까?", "다음 공사는 어떻게 해. 그냥 손해보고 말지 뭐", "아니야 그냥 넘어가기에는 너무 억울해" 설비건설업을 하다보면 누구나 한번쯤 이런 경험이 있었을 것이다. 이럴 경우 공정거래위원회에 문의 하거나 건설하도급분쟁조정협의회에 문의하다가 정 안될 경우 소송에 돌입한다. 소송의 경우 대법원의 최종 판결이 나기까지 2~3년은 고스란히 걸림은 물론 소송비용도 만만치 않다. 이렇게 기간이 길지 않고 가격도 저렴하면서 해결 가능한 방법은 없을까? 물론 있다. 공정거래위원회에 제소하면 된다. 공정거래위원회는 국무총리 소속의 장관급 중앙행정기관이자 합의제 준사법기관으로서 경쟁정책을 수립 · 운영하며 공정거래관련 사건을 심결 · 처리하는 역할을 하고 있다. 정부는 지난 84년 하도급자보호 및 소비자의 보호를 위해 「하도급거래공정화에 관한 법률 」과 「약관의규제에 관한 법률」을 84년과 86년에 각각 제정함으로써 상대적으로 약자인 하도급자도 법의 보호를 받게 되었다. 본지는 지난 7월호 대한상사중재원의 '중재제도'에 이어 이번 8월호에서는 건설하도급분쟁조정협의회를 게재했고, 이번호에는 공정거래위원회에 대하여 게재한다.

• Korean Journal of Construction Engineering and Management
• /
• v.6 no.4 s.26
• /
• pp.181-189
• /
• 2005

This study analyzed and summarized claims that took place during the past three years in the Korean construction-bonds market. Specifically, this study first examined the trend of construction-bonds claims. Second, the claims categorized according to the types of projects, suretyships, duration of settlement, amount of repayment and so on. Finally, based upon the analyzed results several suggestions, which will improve the efficiency of construction claim process, were provided.

• Proceedings of the Korean Institute Of Construction Engineering and Management
• /
• 2004.11a
• /
• pp.629-633
• /
• 2004

The number of claims and disputes among project participants has been steadily increasing last a few years and it creates numerous conflicts and problems in the domestic construction industry. One of the root causes of claims and disputes can be explained by the fact that project objectives of participants are offer different and not aligned. This research is considered as a pre-study of developing a strategy to mitigate conflicts such as claims and disputes in the domestic construction industry by utilizing Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) techniques. This research focused on improving standard contrast documents to establish a systematic dispute resolution process which emphasize the ADR method. To do so, several well-recognized contract documents developed by FIDIC, AIA, ECC were throughly investigated and analyzed using a benchmarking process. Result of the research propose needs of improving the domestic construction document's some clauses and the details will be further Investigated through surveys and expert's opinions.