• Title/Summary/Keyword: Chinese Trade Law

Search Result 54, Processing Time 0.017 seconds

A Comparative Study on the Selection and Discharge of Arbitrator(s) among Korea, China and America (한.중.미 중재인의 선정 및 기피에 관한 비교연구)

  • Shin, Koon-Jae
    • Journal of Arbitration Studies
    • /
    • v.21 no.1
    • /
    • pp.183-213
    • /
    • 2011
  • China and North America have been South Korea's biggest trading partner long time. As the volume of trade has been increasing, the disputes between Korean companies and Chinese Companies and between Korean companies and North American Companies have been increasing. If these disputes are settled by Arbitration, the parties appoint arbitrators who are empowered to proceed the arbitration procedure and have a power to render an arbitral award. Accordingly, it is very important for the parties to select who is an arbitrators in Arbitration. But if the parties doubt their arbitrator(s)'s fairness and independency, they can discharge them in accordance to law and arbitration institute's rules. In comparison with arbitrator system for way of selection and discharge among Korea, China and North America, some differences are found. First, if parties fail to appoint co-arbitrators or the presiding arbitrator by a mutual agreement, the court has the right to appoint them or him in Korea and North America whereas the Chairman of CIETAC choose him in China. Second, the authority to decide whether arbitrator is discharged owing to his fairness and independency, depends on arbitration institute and court in Korea and North American whereas it depends on the Chairman of CIETAC only.

  • PDF

Risk Allocation of Private Port Development with Hierarchical Fuzzy Process

  • Seong, Yu-Chang;Youn, Myung-Ou
    • Journal of Navigation and Port Research
    • /
    • v.31 no.4
    • /
    • pp.317-323
    • /
    • 2007
  • As economic trade between Korea and China has been encouraged with the rapid growth of Chinese economy and port competition in Northeast Asia, Korean government is trying to promote development and consolidation of ports to cope with the lack of facilities. Thus, many projects for port development have been propelled including the enactment the 'Private investment promotion law for social overhead capital 1994.' However, there are still some unsettled issues since considerable part of risk is still allocated to the Government when it has to support the private businesses in these port investments whenever unexpected problems arise. Allocation of risk among the participants - in this case especially - is a very subtle issue, however, it was revealed that not many precedent researches were done on the subject. In my previous research, I classified and analyzed 4 principle risks i.e, construction, management, financial and social risk. This research investigates the reasonable allocation of the risks among the participants using the Hierarchial Fuzzy Process. In the result of analysis, responsibility of private party is the most important and it must put the responsibility before Government' roll concerned. Also, this research displayed and proposed the direction of management method on port development in a view of minimizing risk and maximizing initiative of a private party.

A Study on Application of CISG in the Commercial Arbitration of China - Focus on CIETAC Arbitration Cases - (중국 상사중재에서 CISG의 적용에 관한 연구 - CIETAC 중재사례를 중심으로 -)

  • Han, Na-Hee;Lu, Ying-Chun;Lee, Kab-Soo
    • Journal of Arbitration Studies
    • /
    • v.29 no.1
    • /
    • pp.53-70
    • /
    • 2019
  • This study analyzed some cases of the China International Economic and Trade Arbitration Commision (CIETAC) related to the application of the Contracts for the International Sale of Goods (CISG). As a contracting party of the CISG, China has accumulated a considerable amount of experience in applying CISG through commercial arbitrations. This study sought to understand how CISG is operated in commercial arbitration in China. By analyzing actual cases in China, Korean commercial arbitration can avoid mistakes and further improve. This study of Chinese cases will give some useful information for Korean companies. As defined by the CISG, the applicability can be divided into direct application and indirect application. When China joined the CISG, it made a reservation out of Article 1(1)(b). Korea and China are contracting parties to CISG and CISG is, therefore, directly applied. It is beneficial for Korea to understand how CIETAC is indirectly applied in China then. Some of the results of this study are as follows: First, CIETAC made a correct judgment most of the time on the direct application of CISG. However, there were mistakes in the judgment of the nationality of the parties in a few cases. The parties must clearly define applicable laws when entering into a contract. Secondly, the 2012 "CIETAC Arbitration Rules" was revised so that the "party autonomy" was introduced into Chinese commercial arbitration concerning indirect application. Therefore, the principle of autonomy of the parties was not fully recognized in the past judgments. Instead, the domestic law of China was applied in accordance with the reservation of Article 1(1)(b). Thirdly, China did not explain the application of CISG in Hong Kong, which led to ambiguity in concerned countries. Therefore, it is necessary to confirm the status of CISG in Hong Kong. In addition, Korean companies should clearly define the applicable laws when dealing with Hong Kong companies.

The Scope of Application of North Korea's Foreign Economic Arbitration Act and Foreign Investment Act (북한의 외국인투자법과 대외경제중재법의 적용범위)

  • Jon, Woo-jung
    • Journal of Arbitration Studies
    • /
    • v.30 no.2
    • /
    • pp.91-120
    • /
    • 2020
  • The Scope of Application of North Korea's Foreign Economic Arbitration Act and Foreign Investment Act This article examines whether the Foreign Economic Arbitration Act and the Foreign Investment Act of North Korea apply to South Korean parties or companies. This article analyzes laws and agreements related to economic cooperation between South Korea and North Korea. Furthermore, this article compares and evaluates laws related to foreign investment and enacted in North Korea. Now, North Korea's door is closed due to economic sanctions against it, but it will be opened soon. Thus, this article prepares for the future opening of North Korea's markets. Is there a rule of laws in North Korea or just a ruler? Are there laws in North Korea? North Korea has enacted a number of legislation to attract foreign investors, referring to those Chinese laws. For example, North Korea enacted the Foreigner Investment Act, the Foreigner Company Act, the Foreign Investment Bank Act, the Foreign Economic Arbitration Act, the Foreign Economic Contract Act, the International Trade Act, and the Free Economy and Trade Zone Act, among others. Article 2 (2) of the Foreign Investment Law of North Korea states, "Foreign investors are corporations and individuals from other countries investing in our country." It is interpreted that South Korea is not included in the "other countries" of this definition. According to many mutual agreements signed by South Korea and North Korea, the relationship between the two Koreas is a special relation inside the Korean ethnic group. An arbitration between a South Korean party and a North Korean party has the characteristics of both domestic arbitrations and international arbitrations. If the South Korea and North Korea Commercial Arbitration Commission or the Kaesong Industrial Complex Arbitration Commission is not established, the possibility of arbitration by the Chosun International Trade Arbitration Commission, established under North Korea's Foreign Economic Arbitration Act, should be examined. There have been no cases where the Foreign Economic Arbitration Act is applied to disputes between parties of South Korea and North Korea. It might be possible to apply the Foreign Economic Arbitration Act by recognizing the "foreign factor" of a dispute between the South Korean party and North Korean party. It is necessary to raise legislative clarifications by revising the North Korea's Foreign Economic Arbitration Act as to whether Korean parties or companies are included in the scope of this Act's application. Even if it is interpreted that South Korean parties or companies are not included in the scope of North Korea's Foreign Economic Arbitration Act, disputes between South Korean companies and North Korean companies can be resolved by foreign arbitration institutes such as CIETAC in China, HKIAC in Hong Kong, or SIAC in Singapore. Such arbitration awards could be enforced in North Korea pursuant to Article 64 of North Korea's Foreign Economic Arbitration Act. This is because the arbitration awards of foreign arbitration institutes are included in the scope of North Korea's Foreign Economic Arbitration Act. The matter is how to enforce the North Korean laws when a North Korean party or North Korean government does not abide by the laws or their contracts. It is essential for North Korea to join the New York Convention (Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards) and the ICSID Convention (Convention on the Settlement of Investment Disputes Between States and Nationals of Other States).