• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제12권
• /
• pp.227-252
• /
• 1999

In this Article the writer introduces the origin and preparation of "the UNIDROIT Principles of International Commercial Contracts". In May 1994 the Governing Council of the UNIDROIT gave its formal imprimatur to the UNIDROIT Principles and recommended their widest possible distribution in practice. After brief discussion of the establishment procedure of the UNIDROIT Principles the writer discusses the legal nature of the Principles as an international restatement of contract law. The UNIDROIT Principles has more flexibility than international convention. But it has deficit in the sense of legal stability. Also the scope of application of the Principles was discussed. It can be applied only to the international commercial contracts. It includes two basic principles in it's application, i. e. "commercial contracts" and "international contracts". For the rest of the Article the writer concentrates on the contents of the Principles and the basic ideas underlying the Principles from the point of view of the comparision between the UNIDROIT Principles and "the UN Convention on the International Sale of Goods" (CISG). The UNIDROIT Principles are only restatements and the CISG is an international convention. The application of the CISG is obligatory due to its nature as an international convention. In the contrary the possibility of the application of the UNIDROIT Principles is more flexible. The UNIDROIT Principles is a more comprehensive instrument than CISG. Therefore it can be applied to all kinds of international commercial contracts. In the contrary the CISG can be applied only to international sales contract. Since CISG only deals with contracts for the sale of goods, and the scope of the UNIDROIT Principles is much wider, no overlap can occur where contracts other than sales contracts are concerned. Rather the UNIDROIT Principles can supplement the CISG and the CISG also can be criteria in interpreting the UNIDROIT Principles. As the conclusion the writer summarizes the meanings of the UNIDROIT Principles and presupposed the futur perspectives of the Principles.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제18권1호
• /
• pp.97-119
• /
• 2008

The reluctance of Latin American countries to practice international arbitration is not a new topic in international law. This reluctance historically based on Calvo Doctrine provoked not only the absence of Latin American countries from the major international commercial arbitration conventions, but obsolete national arbitration legislation. Recently, however, these countries have undertaken major steps showing that the region is no longer reluctant to practice international commercial arbitration. Most Latin American countries have ratified the 1958 Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards ("New York Convention"), the 1965 Convention on the Settlement of Investment Disputes ("Washington Convention") and the 1975 Inter-American Convention on International Commercial Arbitration ("Panama Convention"). The majority of Latin American countries have also modified and adapted their national legislation on arbitration to the UNCITRAL model law. Even judiciary has been following this pro-arbitration. This article will focus on some of these factors provoking the acceptance of international commercial arbitration in Latin America to trace the common trends and characteristics in an attempt to understand better how international arbitration set on its place firmly. For this purpose we selected five countries, Brazil, Argentina, Chile, Mexico and Venezuela, to analyse legislations and jurisprudence. Latin America is ready to challenge any obstacles to promote arbitration as alternative methods of judicial resolution. There is an ever-increasing number of international arbitration in Latin America. Both practitioners and judiciary have shown desires to promote the resolution of disputes by arbitration and used the legal instruments to ensure that process interpreting and applying legislations for pro-arbitration. Even there remains Calvo Doctrine's culture in Latin America still now, it should be certain this culture will disappear from the conduct of international arbitration.

• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제42권
• /
• pp.3-32
• /
• 2009

As we know, Incoterms are reflecting only the greatest common measure of practice in int'l trade. Therefore we can think them as the commercial practice most widely used in trade. They contain a number of detail under converse mirror image terms because they connect each other like a thread as to all oversea's commercial transactions between importing buyers and exporting sellers. Therefore they afford convenience to exporters and importers in the world because they tell the parties what to do as to transfer of risk and costs, responsibilities in connection with delivery of the goods. Nonetheless, since Incoterms 1936, they have been periodically revising in order to represent contemporary commercial practice. Therefore, according to change of Int'l trade environment, ICC plans to modify to the 2000 Incoterms. I hope to contribute to revising works by reference of above mentioned revision, that to say, aspects of provision, reflection of prevailing most commonly used, promotion of status as uniform rules, provision of convenience of int'l buyers and sellers. harmony with existing int'l instruments, presentation of criteria in variation of Incoterms.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제28권2호
• /
• pp.137-163
• /
• 2018

Efficiency in the arbitration proceedings and finality of arbitral awards have been key attractive features of arbitration. While finality of awards is due to the fact that there is no appeals mechanism in arbitration, other recourses that are available against arbitral awards threaten the integrity of finality of arbitral awards. This article examines some of these recourses, such as, setting aside of arbitral awards pursuant to the UNCITRAL Model Law, scrutiny of draft awards by arbitration institutions, and annulment proceedings of ICSID Convention awards and discusses the implications of these measures in relation to assuring finality of arbitral awards in international commercial and investment arbitration cases. In order to more effectively respect the disputing parties' autonomy in choosing arbitration, and also to give as much deference to arbitral tribunals' decisions and their discretion in reaching their decisions, it is proposed that an official appellate mechanism would be preferred over the undermining of finality of arbitral awards that have been taking place through the currently available exclusive recourses against arbitral awards.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제19권2호
• /
• 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.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제31권4호
• /
• pp.29-49
• /
• 2021

The Chinese Arbitration Law came into force in 1995 and has been implemented for 26 years. As a party to the New York Convention, there are many contradictions and conflicts between the Chinese Arbitration Law and the New York Convention on the issue of ad hoc arbitration, and this institutional disconnection can bring about problems such as misalignment of arbitration powers. On July 30, 2021, China's Ministry of Justice published a draft of the revised Arbitration Law for public consultation, and the draft has generated a lively debate among the public. This article explores the reasonable and inadequate points of the draft of Arbitration Law in light of the recent trends in the use of commercial arbitration in China, the COVID-19, the Free Trade Zone, and the relationship between the Civil Code and the Arbitration Law.

• 항공우주정책ㆍ법학회지
• /
• 제23권2호
• /
• pp.3-29
• /
• 2008

항공운송과 관련하여 우리나라는 1955년 헤이그 의정서에 의하여 개정된 바르샤바협약과 1999년 몬트리올 협약에 가입하여 국제운송에 관하여는 적용할 법률을 가지고 있지만, 현재 국내항공운송에 관하여는 적용될 법률이 없는 실정이다. 법무부는 상법 내에 항공운송편을 제정하기로 결정하고, 항공운송편제정 특별위원회를 구성하였다. 동 위원회는 2008년 여름 항공운송편 초안을 완성하여 동 초안은 현재 법제처의 심의를 받고 있다. 항공운송편을 제정함에 있어서는 현재까지 성립된 항공운송관련 대부분의 조약을 수용하였다. 항공운송법의 편제는 1장 통칙, 제2장 운송, 제3장 지상 제3자의 손해에 대한 책임 등 총 3개의 장을 두었다. 우리나라가 항공운송에 관한 단행법을 제정하지 않고 상법 제6편에 항공운송편을 두어 제2편 상행위편에 육상운송을 규정하곤 제5편에 해상운송에 관한 규정을 둔 것과 함께! 통합적인 운송법체계를 가진 것은 입법례가 없는 매우 독특한 입법형식을 취한 것이다. 특히 항공기운항자의 지상 제3자의 손해에 대한 책임에 관한 로마조약체계까지도 수용하여 함께 규정한 것은 국내항공운송법체계를 완성한 것으로서 매우 의미 있는 일이라고 생각한다.

• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제62권
• /
• pp.135-178
• /
• 2014

The Uniform Commercial Code (UCC) sets the standards of good faith in a commercial transaction for the sale of goods. With every sales contract, there is an implied obligation for both the seller and the buyer to negotiate the contract and perform under the terms of the contract in good faith. The agreement between both parties and the customs in the industry determine how the good faith standard should be applied to a particular transaction. Generally, the meaning of good faith, though always based on honesty, may vary depending on the specific context in which it is used. A person is said to buy in good faith when he or she holds an honest belief in his or her right or title to the property and has no knowledge or reason to know of any defect in the title. In section 1-201 of the UCC good faith is defined generally as "honesty in fact in the conduct or transaction concerned." Article 2 of the UCC says "good faith in the case of a merchant means honesty in fact and the observance of reasonable commercial standards of fair dealing in the trade." The sales contract will generally determine which party is required to perform first. This provision helps to determine if the buyer or the seller is in breach of the agreement due to failing to perform as stated by the contract. Either the seller must deliver the items before the buyer is required to accept and pay or the buyer must pay for the items before the seller has the duty to act in good faith and deliver the items in a reasonable manner. If the contract does not specifically define who is required to perform, industry customs and fair trade may determine what is acceptable for the transaction. Under the UCC, the buyer is required to pay for the goods when they are delivered, unless the contract states otherwise. Therefore, the UCC imposes an obligation of good faith on the performance of every contract or duty under its purview. The law also generally requires good faith of fiduciaries and agents acting on behalf of their principals. This article discusses problems of the principles of good faith under the UCC. Specifically, this paper focuses on the interpretation of UCC sections and analysis of various cases. By comparing, also, UCC and Korean law, the paper proposes some implications of good faith issues for Korean law.

• 의료법학
• /
• 제8권2호
• /
• pp.291-328
• /
• 2007

Under the present law, a medical corporation has the legalistic character of a noncommercial corporation and its commerciality is restricted by public service. In a recent precedent, however, a judgment has considered the service part in medical practice. The tendency of a precedent is that both commerciality of a medical institution and medical corporation are allowed to be pursued under fundamental order-observance. This change is found in china and india, which consider a medical service as national industry. In the case of ours, the now government demonstrate the industrialization or the market of medical service through promotion of commerciality of a medical corporation. This paper deal with the meaning of a medical corporation and the present condition of medical market under the present law and recommends a tendency of law policy through study of foreign's and our precedent for commerciality of medical advertisement and medical corporation.

• 항공우주정책ㆍ법학회지
• /
• 제26권2호
• /
• pp.125-147
• /
• 2011

현대산업사회에서 화물운송은 종래 대규모 완제품을 대량으로 운송하던 것과 달리, 소비자의 다양한 요구를 반영하여 여러 종류의 소규모 화물을 빈번하게 수송하는 것이 특징이라 할 수 있는데, 그러한 화물 운송업의 시류를 잘 반영하고 있는 것이 국제특송이라 할 것이다. 특히 해외 진출기업 및 유학생의 증가와 더불어 세계적인 한류 열풍, 해외 쇼핑몰을 통한 반입 물자의 증가 등으로 국제택배산업은 매년 10% 이상 성장하는 고성장산업이다. 국제특송에 관하여 현재까지 우리나라에서는 항공법에 '상업서류 송달업'으로 규정하여 근거규정을 두고 있었다. 하지만 동 규정에 대해 항공법과 연결되어 있는 우편법이 신서송달의 예외로 종전과 달리 '외국과 특급배달서비스를 이용하여 수발하는 서류'를 새롭게 추가하였으므로, 항공법상 상업서류 송달업에 관한 개정도 불가피한 상황에 놓이게 되었다. 항공법상 상업서류 송달업에 관한 규정을 개정하는 방안으로 항공법 특히 현재 제정안이 공포된 "항공사업법"상에 그 명칭을 변경하거나 문구를 수정하는 방안이 선행되어야 할 것이고, 이러한 근거규정의 정비와 별도로 당사자간의 권리와 의무, 사업자의 손해배상책임에 관한 새로운 입법을 모색하는 것이 바람직할 것으로 생각된다. 사견으로는 향후 택배관련 입법에 상업서류 송달업 즉, 국제특송업에 관한 내용을 추가하는 것을 제안한다. 국제특송업에 관한 입법에서는 먼저 국제특송업에 관한 개념 정의가 필요하다. 국제특송업은 운송주선적 측면과 운송적 측면을 동시에 가지고 있고, 필연적으로 육상과 항공의 복합운송이라는 점에서 독립적인 지위가 확인된다. 또한 국제특송 사업자의 손해배상책임에 관한 책임제한액과 관련하여, 현재 시행되고 있는 사업자의 약관은 대체적으로 항공운송인의 책임제한원칙을 가감없이 수용하고 있다. 항공운송이 전체 국제특송운송에서 필수적인 부분을 차지하는 점에서 이러한 책임원칙의 도입은 불가피할 것으로 보이나, 특송물품의 특성상 일반적인 항공화물과는 차이가 있어야 할 것이다. 사견으로는 송하인이 국제특송계약을 체결하는 시점에 추가 요금을 지급하고 별도의 보험에 가입함으로써 운송물의 손해발생 시에 고가의 손해배상금을 수령할 수 있는 제도를 활성화하는 것이 좋을 것으로 생각한다.