• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.28 no.4
• /
• pp.111-129
• /
• 2018

The foundation of arbitration is the arbitration agreement between parties. If no agreement to arbitrate exists, the parties should not send to arbitrate their disputes. In the United States, there are no provisions as to arbitrability under the Federal Arbitration Act. Before a court can enforce arbitration, it must first determine arbitrability. The general presumption is that the issue of arbitrability should be resolved by the courts. The question of whether parties have submitted a particular dispute to arbitration raises a question of arbitrability which is an issue for judicial determination unless the parties clearly and unmistakably have provided otherwise. Determining if the parties agreed to arbitrate a dispute involves inquiries into whether there is a valid agreement to arbitrate the claims, and the dispute falls within the scope of the arbitration agreement. Therefore, the purpose of this article is to review how to settle the issue of arbitrability in the U.S. federal courts.

• International Commerce and Information Review
• /
• v.17 no.3
• /
• pp.203-222
• /
• 2015

Papers in FTA research have mostly focused on the legal interpretation of the FTA treaties. In this research, more focus was put on the customs laws and related cases delivered in the U.S. federal courts, by which we can analyze the Korea-U.S. FTA in more practical manner to derive the enterprises' solutions to cope with the disputes of FTA preferential duty. The Tariff Act of 1930 is the U.S. customs law to govern FTA preferential duties. The administrative practices with customs duties are coordinated with the FTA rules. The most controversial issue in the U.S. customs law lies in the classification of imported goods for imposition of the customs duties, based on Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States. It was found that the U.S. federal courts had been quite favorable to the CBP(U.S. Customs and Border Protections) in litigation with the private importers and exporters. The reason seems to be that the CBP has been dealing with the customs cases so many times, accumulating much experience in execution of the U.S. customs laws, which is likely to make their decisions on customs duties almost free of errors. Therefore, the Korean exporters need to collect the CBP's past cases on the denial of preferential treatment on imported goods and be fully informed of the CBP's policies on the FTA preferential duty treatment.