• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.19 no.2
• /
• pp.179-195
• /
• 2009

필리핀의 중재제도를 규정하고 있는 법령은 다음과 같다. 즉 필리핀 민법(법률 제386호), 중재법(법률 제876호), 대체분쟁해결법(법률 제9285호), 국제상거래중재에 관한 국제 연합 국제상거래법위원회(UNCITRAL) 표준법 및 건설산업중재에 관한 대통령령(제1008호)이다. 2004년의 대체적 분쟁해결 제도(ADR) 에 관련된 필리핀 의회의 입법은 필리핀의 중재 실무와 절차에 광범위한 변화를 가져 왔다. 또한 국제중재실무에서 필리핀에 많은 도움을 주었다. 다른 한편으로는 상당한 변화를 가진 UNCITRAL 표준법의 채택과 국내 중재를 관장하는 법률속에 표준법 조항을 편입함으로써 필리핀은 분쟁해결의 대체안으로써 정책 결정의 실행에 대한 중재법의 인식과 ADR법에 있어서의 정책조문의 검토로 보다 실질적인 중재제도가 정착되는 기반을 조성하게 되었다. 국내에서 수행하고 있는 국제적인 중재는 아직까지는 비교적 적다고 생각된다. 그러나 ADR법 내에 규정된 강력한 ADR찬성정책과 ADR에 관대하고 특히 중재에 호의적인 대법원의 친중재적 판결로 인해 향후 수년내에 필리핀과 주변국과의 무역이 크게 증대될 것으로 전망된다.

• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.18 no.3
• /
• pp.3-22
• /
• 2008

The purpose of this article is to make research on the meaning and function of the place of arbitration for, the international commercial arbitration. For this purpose is to analyse regal issue the meaning and function of the place of arbitration on the international commercial arbitration relating to the arbitration law and the recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitral awards. In this Article is dealt with Art. 2 para. 1 of the Korean Arbitration Act(KAA). The KAA corresponds with the connection to the place of arbitration, the internationally prevailing 'the principle of territoriality'. The place of arbitration is therefore great practical relevance, as there is not only the existing legal supplements on the arbitration procedure applies, but also in the state courts rule for the support and control of the tribunal are responsible. In this context, this article first intends the importance of the place of arbitration for determination of the applicable procedural law. Secondly, this article intends the importance of the place of arbitration for the recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitral awards under "the United Nations Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards(New York Convention)". In conclusion, this article stresses, that the place of arbitration setting under Article 21 para. 1 KAA determine not only the applicable arbitration law, but also the jurisdiction of state courts in lawsuit for repeal of arbitration and qualification as a domestic or foreign arbitration award.

• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.19 no.2
• /
• pp.3-26
• /
• 2009

This paper is to research on the role of party autonomy in the decision of applicable law for the arbitral proceeding, arbitral award and arbitration agreement, in the decision of the place of arbitration, in the composition of arbitration tribunal, and the choice of arbitral proceedings. The principle of party autonomy is fundamental to arbitration in general and to international arbitration in particular. Generally the tenn of party autonomy is used as the autonomy of the parties to decide all aspects of an arbitration procedure subject only to certain limitations of mandatory law. Party autonomy permits the parties to a commercial arbitration to choose the laws and make the rules which govern the arbitral proceedings. Party autonomy allows the parties freedom to choose the applicable laws for the arbitral proceeding and the place of arbitration. Party autonomy is recognized in relation to the choice of law for the merits of the dispute as well as for the arbitration agreement and the arbitration procedure. On the basis of the recognition of party autonomy in international treaties, national legislation and court decisions, arbitral practice has generally accepted and enforced party autonomy both regarding the procedure and the applicable substantive law. All modern institutional rules of arbitration follow that line. Today it is recognized by national legislators all over the world to the effect that the jurisdiction of national courts can be excluded by arbitration agreement and that the parties may choose the law applicable to arbitral proceedings. Limits on party autonomy are imposed by mandatory provisions of international or national law or of institutional arbitration rules regarding the procedure. Mandatory laws at the place of the arbitration or under any procedural law chosen by the parties may restrict party autonomy. These mandatory laws usually take the form of public policy considerations in the arbitration. Limitations on party autonomy have been reduced more and more, and the trend of modern national as well as international legislation on arbitration leans clearly in the direction of a maximum of party autonomy.

• Journal of Navigation and Port Research
• /
• v.38 no.1
• /
• pp.81-87
• /
• 2014

Today, it is a trend that the demand of offshore plants is constantly growing, along with the advances in technology which are thoroughly needed to the rise of international oil price as well as offshore energy development. In addition, The main sectors of ship building, sale & purchase and chartering market regarding various kind of offshore supporting vessels that supports the business of offshore energy development is now maintaining its steady growth. However, in domestic case, the contract of time charter occasions regarding the offshore support vessel are almost non-existing situation. Thus, the relevant practical study regarding to implementation of various kinds of legal disputes and applicable laws that can be properly applied in time charter and the field of sale & purchase needs to be conducted actively. Therefore, the concept of this study has included the wide comparisons of other special provisions with the existing time-charter by making its base on "Supply Time 2005" which is the worldwide standard form of time charter in offshore support vessel market and its investigation, aiming to provide practical guidance and procedure for implementation of arbitration and applicable law issues which can be applied in legal disputes between parties.

• Korea Trade Review
• /
• v.42 no.2
• /
• pp.205-225
• /
• 2017

The study attempts to verify the case related to the notice of payment refusal by issuing bank regarding discrepancy in transport document under L/C(Letter of Credit) transaction. Considering the high portion of trade between Korea and China, Korean companies and banks in L/C transaction should be careful about many unpredictable situations. The case of this study is that Chinese seller(beneficiary) initiated a civil suit against Industrial Bank of Korea to Chinese court and Chinese courts in the first and second trials judged that the notice of payment refusal by Industrial bank of Korea doesn't satisfy Article 16, (c) (ii) (iii) in UCP 600. However, Industrial Bank of Korea implements the judgement even though the judgement is highly biased to Chinese seller. Considering the judgement by Chinese courts, the study suggests some countermeasures to Korean companies and banks which opened L/C. First, the issuing bank should describe the contents of discrepancy specifically based on Article 16, (c) in UCP 600. Second, it is necessary to insert a clause regarding governing law in the L/C contract like sales contract. Third, considering the biased judgement by Chinese court and difficulty in execution of foreign judgement in China, it is recommended to using arbitration as a method of dispute resolution such as ICLOCA and DOCDEX Rules which are international system operated by international instruments because it has legal effects to parties in L/C contracts if the issuing bank inserts arbitration clause in L/C.

• Korea Trade Review
• /
• v.43 no.5
• /
• pp.139-158
• /
• 2018

As trade volume increases and the business environment becomes more complex and competitive, international trade disputes are also increasing and becoming more complex. Parties need to become more aware of alternatives to costly and time consuming arbitration and litigation. The ADR (Alternative Dispute Resolution) can encompass all dispute resolution processed and can act as a substitute for traditional litigation. Mediation, a type of ADR, offers an amicable dispute settlement mechanism between concerned parties through a natural mediator. There are several strong points of mediation compared with litigation or arbitration. First of all, mediation can take place without having to complete time-consuming and expensive discovery processes associated with litigation. In addition, since mediation is considered a private process, the dispute can remain out of the public eye. It can be embarrassing and disrupt business when customer or suppliers learn that a company is involved in litigation. Lastly, mediation is less adversarial than litigation or arbitration, so the parties often can salvage their relationships. Often the parties to mediation find themselves continuing to conduct business. In spite of such benefits of mediation, it is less used in Korea and therefore, this article aims to promote the mediation system in international trade disputes. However, this paper has limitation, for example, why ADR is not used well in Korea and need to suggest how ADR can work best in international trade disputes.