• Title/Summary/Keyword: Alternative Dispute Resolution: ADR

Search Result 98, Processing Time 0.028 seconds

A Study on Alternative Medical Disput Resolution -With a Focus on Medical Dispute Mediation of Kca- (제소 전 의료분쟁 해결에 관한 연구 -한국소비자원 의료분쟁 조정을 중심으로-)

  • Kim, Kyoung-Reay
    • The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
    • /
    • v.13 no.1
    • /
    • pp.71-89
    • /
    • 2012
  • Just in case a patient's state couldn't get better or get even worse after medical practices, it is difficult for the patient's side to accept the result and it tends to think that its damage is caused by his doctor's malpractice. Medical practices of a doctor require highly advanced attention duty as a medical expert, because they are targeted at a human body of the best benefit and protection of the law. However, it is hard to prove the malpractice on the patient's side in medical dispute. Therefore, to solve a medical dispute quickly and fairly before the medical suit Korea Consumer Agency (KCA) has done a medical dispute adjustment business since 1999. For the past 5 years (2006~2010), the medical team of KCA had managed 4,171 cases as an injury relief, but it had dealt with them focusing on an injury relief business only after the occurrence of a medical accident. Afterwards, it is necessary to expand the range of its services in purpose of preventing the injury of consumers. If we can solve the problems -the clear statements about the cease of extinctive prescription in the fundamentals of comsumer act, the presence of parties directly concerned at comsumer dispute adjustment committee, and the effect of an agreement, etc. -, which have been founded in medical injury relief service of KCA and the management and procedures of the comsumer dispute adjustment committee of KCA and if we can also give KCA more workers and the proper budget of the government, we can expect KCA to become a more useful agency.

  • PDF

A Study on the Disputes and its Improvement in the Process of Producing Digital Music Source (대중음악 음원제작과정에서의 분쟁발생과 그 개선점에 대한 고찰)

  • Kang, Da-Hye
    • Journal of Arbitration Studies
    • /
    • v.27 no.2
    • /
    • pp.59-81
    • /
    • 2017
  • The purpose of this study is to find a solution to disputes in the process of producing digital music sources. At present, the center of the world music market including the domestic market has been completely transformed from the tangible musical record market to the intangible sound source market. Due to these environmental changes, the music production process becomes industrialized and specialized, causing conflicts of interest among the individuals in the process. First of all, this study examined changes in the music market which is the background of the dispute, identified the problems of the process and suggested solutions while summarizing the meaning and role of each process of producing a sound source that may arise during the sound production process. This study covers plagiarism between producers, copyright infringement of the creator against assistant creator caused by the industrialization and division of the production environment, issues related to the rights of sound engineers whose role and importance become bigger as acoustic technology develops and music genres become more diverse, and vertical hierarchy due to the formation of oligopoly by several distributors with huge capital. As a result of the study, it was concluded that Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) system is suitable for solving these problems. Specific methods of using ADR include activation of the dispute settlement system of the Korea Copyright Commission, active use of the arbitration clause specified in the standard contract, and recalculation of labor costs and earnings from copyright through mutual negotiations. This paper can be differentiated from previous studies in that it studied overall problems that might arise in the process of digital music source production and suggested ADR utilization as the solution.

A Study on Comparison of Commercial Arbitration System in Korea and U.S.A. (한국과 미국의 상사중재제도에 관한 비교연구)

  • 이강빈
    • Journal of Arbitration Studies
    • /
    • v.12 no.1
    • /
    • pp.271-321
    • /
    • 2002
  • Every year, many million of business transactions take place. Ocassionally, disagreements develop over these business transactions. Many of these disputes are resolved by mediation, arbitration and out-of-court settlement options. The American Arbitration Association(AAA) helps resolve a wide range of disputes through mediation, arbitration, elections and other out-of-court settlement procedures. The AAA offers a broad range of dispute resolution services to business executives, attorneys, individuals, trade associations, unions, management, consumers, families, communities, and all level of governments. The 198,491 cases composed of the 194,303 arbitration cases and the 4,188 mediation cases, were filed with the AAA in 2000. These case filings represent a full range of matters, including commercial finance, construction, labor and employment, environmental, health care, insurance, real state, securities, and technology disputes. The Korean Commercial Arbitration Board (KCAB) does more than render arbitration services. It helps facilitate settlements and guarantee implementation thereof between trading partners at home and abroad involving disputes related to such areas as the sale of commodities, construction, joint venture agreements, technical assistance, agency agreements, and maritime transport. The 643 cases composed of the the 197 arbitration cases and the 446 mediation cases, were filed with the KCAB in 2001. There are some differences between the AAA and the KCAB regarding the number and the area of mediation and arbitration case filings, the breath of service offerings, the scope of alternative dispute resolution, and the education and training. In order to apply to the proceedings of the commercial mediation and arbitration, the AAA has the Commercial Mediation Rules, the Commercial Arbitration Rules, the Expedited Procedures, the Optional Procedures for Large, Complex Commerical Dispute, and the Optional Rules for Emergency Measures of Protection as amended and effective on September 1, 2000. In order to apply to the proceedings of commercial arbitration, the KCAB has the Arbitration Rules as amended by the Supreme Court on April 27, 2000, which have been changed to incorporate the revisions of the Arbitration Act that went into effect on December 31, 1999. There are some differences between the AAA's commercial Arbitration Rules and the KCAB's Arbitration Rules regarding the clauses of jurisdiction and administrative conference, number of arbitrators, communication with arbitrator, vacancies, preliminary hearing, exchange of information, oaths, evidence by affidavit and posthearing filing of documents or others, interim measures, serving of notice, form of award, scope of award, delivery of award to parties, modification of award, release of liability, administrative fees, neutral arbitrator's compensation, and expedited procedures. In conclusion, for the vitalization of KCAB and its ADR system, the following measures should be taken : the effective case management, the development of on0-line ADR, the establishment of ADR system of electronic commerce disputes, and the variety of dispute resolution rules in each expert field.

  • PDF

Judicial Review on Pre-arbitration Agreement in Terms to Resolve Franchise Dispute (프랜차이즈 분쟁계약상 사전중재합의에 관한 법리적 검토)

  • Sung, Joon-Ho
    • Journal of Arbitration Studies
    • /
    • v.29 no.1
    • /
    • pp.3-29
    • /
    • 2019
  • A franchise business is a business in which the owners, or "franchisors," sell the rights to their business logo, name, and model to third party retail outlets, owned by independent, third party operators, called "franchisees." There are a number of features in franchising or terms in franchise agreements that may lead to disputes between franchisors and franchisees. These disputes may arise because of underlying risks in the franchise relationship, franchise agreement, or conduct of the parties. In this case, ADR is an effective way to resolve disputes in a quicker and often less costly way than having to go to court. If an agreement cannot be reached through mediation, then arbitration becomes the next step to resolving the differences. Whereas mediation is non-binding and focused on facilitating the parties to find a resolution that is acceptable to both, arbitration is binding and may result in a decision that is not acceptable to one of the parties. These situations can be resolved through experienced arbitration as arbitration allows franchisees to settle matters promptly and outside of the public eye. In addition, franchise dispute arbitration is usually less costly than going to traditional court. Considering all of these, reaching an agreement will also have typical clauses that address the issue of dispute resolution. It is again a more efficient process than going through the legal process and courts and is often less costly. By going through arbitration, the parties agree to give up their rights to pursue the dispute in the courts. However, there is a problem that the arbitration prior to the agreement and under the terms would be contrary to the restriction of jurisdiction under the "ACT ON THE REGULATION OF TERMS AND CONDITIONS" in Korea.

The Plan for Application of a Sports Arbitration and Conciliation System -With Kim yeon-kyoung's Case as the Center - (스포츠 조정·중재제도의 활용방안 - K 선수 사례 중심으로-)

  • Kim, Gyu-Beom
    • Journal of Arbitration Studies
    • /
    • v.26 no.2
    • /
    • pp.67-89
    • /
    • 2016
  • An ADR arbitration system has a necessary value in the sports industry for settlement of disputes. Sports disputes should be resolved independently by enacting internal regulations within the basic principles of national law rather than treated as a civil action. If the dispute is not fair and transparent, it may cause distrust. Because an arbitration system has values such as speed, flexibility of economic decisions, professionalism of arbitrator and confidentiality of arbitration-related information, the efficiency of the arbitration system for conflict resolution has emerged recently. We have to assign sports experts to reactivate sports arbitration commission committees which existed from 2006 to 2009 in Korea. Many countries, such as the UK, USA, Canada, New Zealand, Hungary, the Netherlands, Poland, Germany, and Japan, which attain advancement of sports and the International Court of Arbitration establish and run their own sports arbitration agencies. However, Korea disbanded its sports arbitration commission committee for political and economic reasons. In 2012, after their disbanding, athlete Kim Yeon-kyoung came into conflict with Heungkuk Life over terms of free agent acquisition and international transfer certification. Finally they were able to settle those political conflicts. However if there had been related laws in Korea, they could have resolved those problems easily without international disputes. Practically, it would have been almost impossible for Kim Yeon-kyoung to win the dispute. But her problem became an issue after the London Olympics, so she could win. Although it is well for her to take an active role on the international stage, it left much to be desired on account of the intervention of political circles in order to resolve the conflict. If the sports arbitration commission committee in Korea had still been active, it could have come to a peaceful settlement domestically. Therefore we have to reestablish a Korean sports arbitration committee centered around experts of sports law.

Analysis of Research Trends in the 30 Years of 'Journal of Arbitration Studies' ('중재연구' 30년간의 연구동향 분석 - 한국중재학회 창립30주년에 즈음한 학술연구 동향분석 -)

  • Sung, Joon-Ho
    • Journal of Arbitration Studies
    • /
    • v.31 no.2
    • /
    • pp.3-22
    • /
    • 2021
  • Civil and commercial disputes can be resolved through alternative dispute settlement systems other than court proceedings. Among them, the arbitration procedure is a system that is clearly distinguished from the mediation procedure in which the dispute is terminated by agreement between the parties. The arbitration proceedings shall have the same effect as the result of the final judgment by the decision of a third-party arbitrator, and its essence is a judgment. The Korean Arbitration Association Studies was founded in December 1990 to recognize the importance of arbitration procedures and conduct specialized research on them, with professional research on 'arbitration procedures' continuing until today. Thus, the Korean Arbitration Association Studies is positioned as the only specialized research organization in the field of arbitration. In the case of the Korean Arbitration Association Studies, which is the only society in Korea related to arbitration and alternative dispute resolution, the members are mainly scholars majoring in trade and commerce and ones majoring in law. This situation reflects the distinctive character of the arbitration system because it is a matter of dispute procedures related to trade and commerce and many scholars who research trade and commerce need to prepare for possible disputes. In addition, the arbitration procedure is a dispute settlement procedure that substitutes for litigation because it has research value as a legal system. In particular, the 'Journal of Arbitration Studies' published by the Korean Arbitration Association plays a role in mediation, as well as mediation and presentation of research papers in the ADR field. This study analyzes the trends of mediation and ADR-related papers published in 'Journal of Arbitration Studies', an academic journal of the Korean Arbitration Association Studies, in four dimensions, celebrating the 30th anniversary of the Korean Arbitration Association Studies. First, this study examined which sub-themes are mainly studied among the various viewpoints of mediation through thematic analysis. Second, it looked at what methodology was used to study intervention at the methodological level. Third, it assessed what countries and regions had been mainly studied at the regional level. Fourth, in terms of content, what kind of research had been mainly conducted and what kind of research was relatively insufficient was investigated, analyzing the research results of the last 30 years and presenting a milestone for the research direction of 'Journal of Arbitration Studies' in the future.

A Study on the System of Litigation and Ideal Dispute Resolution (소송제도와 이상적인 분쟁해결제도에 관한 연구 - 대법원의 상고법원 설치안을 중심으로 -)

  • SHIN, Han-Dong
    • THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
    • /
    • v.68
    • /
    • pp.43-63
    • /
    • 2015
  • The number of final appeal(the rate of final appeal: 43%) has been on the increase every year over the past ten years in Korea. The number of final appeal cases given to a justice of the Korean Supreme Court amounts to nearly one everyday, which makes it vulnerable to faulty decisions. Reversal rate of final appeal is as low as 10% with most of the cases being dismissed and hence the percentage of people having trust in the judiciary is merely 27%. In this context, the Korean judiciary has announced its plan to set up a final appellate court in the Supreme Court. The establishment of final appellate court, however, is not only against the Constitution but also hardly seen in other nations. It would only overexpand the Supreme Court. Furthermore, the final appellate court would end up deteriorating into the court of fourth instance and impose extra burden on the government as well as on the disputing parties. Therefore, it is necessary to upgrade the quality of the court by increasing the number of judges in the lower court and let them focus on the fact finding process. Facilitating the ADR(Alternative Dispute Resolution) process such as arbitration would help improve the structure of the judiciary. The incompatibility among the four values of the dispute resolution process(equitability, truth, quickness and efficiency) calls for building comprehensive judicial system in which disputes are settled by choosing either jurisprudence or utility.

  • PDF

The Multi-door Courthouse: Origin, Extension, and Case Studies (멀티도어코트하우스제도: 기원, 확장과 사례분석)

  • Chung, Yongkyun
    • Journal of Arbitration Studies
    • /
    • v.28 no.2
    • /
    • pp.3-43
    • /
    • 2018
  • The emergence of a multi-door courthouse is related with a couple of reasons as follows: First, a multi-door courthouse was originally initiated by the United States government that increasingly became impatient with the pace and cost of protracted litigation clogging the courts. Second, dockets of courts are overcrowded with legal suits, making it difficult for judges to handle those legal suits in time and causing delays in responding to citizens' complaints. Third, litigation is not suitable for the disputant that has an ongoing relationship with the other party. In this case, even if winning is achieved in the short run, it may not be all that was hoped for in the long run. Fourth, international organizations such as the World Bank, UNDP, and Asia Development Bank urge to provide an increased access to women, residents, and the poor in local communities. The generic model of a multi-door courthouse consists of three stages: The first stage includes a center offering intake services, along with an array of dispute resolution services under one roof. At the second stage, the screening unit at the center would diagnose citizen disputes, then refer the disputants to the appropriate door for handling the case. At the third stage, the multi-door courthouse provides diverse kinds of dispute resolution programs such as mediation, arbitration, mediation-arbitration (med-arb), litigation, and early neutral evaluation. This study suggests the extended model of multi-door courthouse comprised of five layers: intake process, diagnosis and door-selection process, neutral-selection process, implementation process of dispute resolution, and process of training and education. One of the major characteristics of extended multi-door courthouse model is the detailed specification of individual department corresponding to each process within a multi-door courthouse. The intake department takes care of the intake process. The screening department plays the role of screening disputes, diagnosing the nature of disputes, and determining a suitable door to handle disputes. The human resources department manages experts through the construction and management of the data base of mediators, arbitrators, and judges. The administration bureau manages the implementation of each process of dispute resolution. The education and training department builds long-term planning to procure neutrals and experts dealing with various kinds of disputes within a multi-door courthouse. For this purpose, it is necessary to establish networks among courts, law schools, and associations of scholars in order to facilitate the supply of manpower in ADR neutrals, as well as judges in the long run. This study also provides six case studies of multi-door courthouses across continents in order to grasp the worldwide picture and wide spread phenomena of multi-door courthouse. For this purpose, the United States and Latin American countries including Argentina and Brazil, Middle Eastern countries, and Southeast Asian countries (such as Malaysia and Myanmar), Australia, and Nigeria were chosen. It was found that three kinds of patterns are discernible during the evolution of a multi-door courthouse model. First, the federal courts of the United States, land and environment court in Australia, and Lagos multi-door courthouse in Nigeria may maintain the prototype of a multi-door courthouse model. Second, the judicial systems in Latin American countries tend to show heterogenous patterns in terms of the adaptation of a multi-door courthouse model to their own environments. Some court systems of Latin American countries including those of Argentina and Brazil resemble the generic model of a multi-door courthouse, while other countries show their distinctive pattern of judicial system and ADR systems. Third, it was found that legal pluralism is prevalent in Middle Eastern countries and Southeast Asian countries. For example, Middle Eastern countries such as Saudi Arabia have developed various kinds of dispute resolution methods, such as sulh (mediation), tahkim (arbitration), and med-arb for many centuries, since they have been situated at the state of tribe or clan instead of nation. Accordingly, they have no unified code within the territory. In case of Southeast Asian countries such as Myanmar and Malaysia, they have preserved a strong tradition of customary laws such as Dhammthat in Burma, and Shriah and the Islamic law in Malaysia for a long time. On the other hand, they incorporated a common law system into a secular judicial system in Myanmar and Malaysia during the colonial period. Finally, this article proposes a couple of factors to strengthen or weaken a multi-door courthouse model. The first factor to strengthen a multi-door courthouse model is the maintenance of flexibility and core value of alternative dispute resolution. We also find that fund raising is important to build and maintain the multi-door courthouse model, reflecting the fact that there has been a competition surrounding the allocation of funds within the judicial system.

An Overview of the ADR Act of 2004 in the Philippines - Focused on the Adoption of the UNCITRAL Model Law - (필리핀의 2004년 대체적 분쟁해결법 소고 - UNCITRAL 모범법의 수용과 관련하여 -)

  • Kim, Sun-Jeong
    • Journal of Arbitration Studies
    • /
    • v.19 no.2
    • /
    • pp.197-227
    • /
    • 2009
  • This study describe the brief history and current statutes of Philippine arbitration. The practice of arbitration in the Philippines can be traced as far back as the barangay. From 1521, Spanish Civil Code became effective in the Philippines. During this period, the Supreme court was discouraged by the tendency of some courts to nullify arbitration clauses on the ground that the clauses ousted the judiciary of its jurisdiction. According to the growing need for a law regulating arbitration in general was acknowledged when Republic Act No.876(1953), otherwise known as the Arbitration Law, was passed. In 1958, the Philippines became a signatory to the New York Convention and in 1967 the said Convention was ratified. But no legislation has been passed. As a consequence, foreign arbitral awards have sometimes been deemed only presumptively valid, rather than conclusively valid. Fifty years after, the Philippine Congress enacted, Republic Act No. 9285, otherwise know as the Alternative Dispute Resolution Act of 2004. The enactment was the Philippines solution to making arbitration an efficient and effective method specially for international arbitration. To keep pace with the developments in international trade, ADR Act of 2004 also ensured that international commercial arbitration would be governed by the UNCITRAL Model Law on International Arbitration and also fortified the use and purpose of the New York Convention by specifically mandating. If the international commercial arbitration will be revitalization in the near future in the Philippine, it will be shown that the model law's comprehensive provisions will give the beat framework for arbitration.. The writer expect that Philippines continues in its effort to be the premier site for international arbitration in Southeast Asia.

  • PDF

A Study on the Need for Arbitration and Agreement in Sports Disputes (스포츠중재의 필요성과 중재합의에 관한 고찰)

  • Jeon, Hong-Gu
    • Journal of Arbitration Studies
    • /
    • v.26 no.1
    • /
    • pp.3-27
    • /
    • 2016
  • There is a need for disputes in sports to be settled by arbitration rather than a court ruling, taking the unique characteristics of sports into consideration. Arbitration is a form of alternative dispute resolution (ADR). A dispute resolution system is regarded as: an arbitrator is selected by the agreement between the parties, and a binding decision is made, which the parties obey, consequently resulting in a final resolution. To resolve a dispute upon arbitration, there must be an arbitration agreement upon the free will of the parties. In relation to the arbitration agreement, however, there are some cases in which sports organizations have an arbitration clause in the articles of association, regulations or player registration application that call for settling disputes by arbitration. In such cases, the validity of the arbitration agreement may create doubt whether or not this sort of arbitration has been made by mutual agreement. Consequently this is required to be legally examined. The activities of a sports organization are recognized as part of private autonomy, and they include even the rights that establish regulations or rules. Nonetheless, the powers that such sport organizations are able to establish are not allowed without limit. However, sports activities and autonomy shall be protected as themselves. Therefore, if we give priority to arbitration upon the independent arbitrator and fair process by establishing an independent arbitral organization in charge of sports disputes to handle the effective resolution of disputes and protect sports autonomy and ask for a court decision if one party disobeys the arbitration, or the sports arbitration prepositive principle, it seems helpful to resolve the unfairness of compulsory jurisdiction and the clause for sports arbitration and protect the player's right of choice and of claims for trial.