• 제목/요약/키워드: Contractual Approach

검색결과 28건 처리시간 0.019초

SGA에서 매수인의 계약해제권에 관한 연구: CISG와의 비교를 중심으로 (A Comparative Study on the Right to Avoid the Contract of the Buyer under SGA and CISG)

  • 민주희
    • 아태비즈니스연구
    • /
    • 제11권3호
    • /
    • pp.273-290
    • /
    • 2020
  • Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to examine the buyer's right to avoid the contract under SGA and CISG. Design/methodology/approach - This paper has conducted literature reviews to analyze the right to avoid the contract of the buyer based on the comparative study. Findings - Under s. 11(3) of SGA, the breach of a condition and an intermediate which deprives the buyer substantially of the whole benefit of the contract may give rise to a right to treat the contract as repudiated. But under Art. 49 of CISG, the buyer has the right to terminate the contract where the seller's failure to performance amounts to a fundamental breach of contract. Regarding the breach of an intermediate and the breach under CISG, the buyer should take into account where the seller's breach is fundamental or not. Moreover, an anticipatory breach can give rise to a right to avoid the contract. The anticipatory breach of a condition justifies termination. The breach of an intermediate and the breach under CISG require an anticipatory fundamental breach of the contract. Under SGA, the buyer has to prove an anticipatory breach in fact but CISG does not require virtual certainty, which SGA has stricter criteria to assess an anticipatory breach. Research implications or Originality - Comparative study helps to understand the nature of provisions under SGA and CISG and suggests practical advice to choose applicable laws. SGA gives more certainty to classify a contractual term. In case of the breach of a condition including the anticipatory breach under SGA, the buyer does not have to ask how much serious the breach is. But CISG requires the fundamental breach of the contract, which means that the buyer has the more burden of proof compared with SGA.

A Comparative Study on Marine Transport Contract and Marine Insurance Contract with Reference to Unseaworthiness

  • Pak, Jee-Moon
    • Journal of Korea Trade
    • /
    • 제25권2호
    • /
    • pp.152-177
    • /
    • 2021
  • Purpose - This study analyses the excepted requirement and burden of proof of the carrier due to unseaworthiness through comparison between the marine transport contract and marine insurance contract. Design/methodology - This study uses the legal analytical normative approach. The juridical approach involves reviewing and examining theories, concepts, legal doctrines and legislation that are related to the problems. In this study a literature analysis using academic literature and internet data is conducted. Findings - The burden of proof in case of seaworthiness should be based on presumed fault, not proved fault. The burden of proving unseaworthiness/seaworthiness should shift to the carrier, and should be exercised before seeking the protections of the law or carriage contract. In other words, the insurer cannot escape coverage for unfitness of a vessel which arises while the vessel is at sea, which the assured could not have prevented in the exercise of due diligence. The insurer bears the burden of proving unseaworthiness. The warranty of seaworthiness is implied in hull, but not protection and indemnity policies. The 2015 Act repeals ss. 33(3) and 34 of MIA 1906. Otherwise the provisions of the MIA 1906 remain in force, including the definition of a promissory warranty and the recognition of implied warranties. There is less clarity about the position when the source of the loss occurs before the breach of warranty but the actual loss is suffered after the breach. Nonetheless, by s.10(2) of the 2015 Act the insurer appears not to be liable for any loss occurring after the breach of warranty and before there has been a remedy. Originality/value - When unseaworthiness is identified after the sailing of the vessel, mere acceptance of the ship does not mean the party waives any claims for damages or the right to terminate the contract, provided that failure to comply with the contractual obligations is of critical importance. The burden of proof with regards to loss of damage to a cargo caused by unseaworthiness is regulated by the applicable law. For instance, under the common law, if the cargo claimant alleges that the loss or damage has been caused by unseaworthiness, then he has the burden of proof to establish the followings: (i) that the vessel was unseaworthy at the beginning of the voyage; and that, (ii) that the loss or damage has been caused by such unseaworthiness. In other words, if the warranty of seaworthiness at the inception of the voyage is breached, the breach voids the policy if the ship owner had prior knowledge of the unseaworthy condition. By contrast, knowingly permitting the vessel to break ground in an unseaworthy condition denies liability only for loss or damage proximately caused by the unseaworthiness. Such a breach does not, therefore, void the entire policy, but only serves to exonerate the insurer for loss or damage proximately caused by the unseaworthy condition.

"무역상무(貿易商務)에의 역사적(歷史的) 어프로치와 무역취인(貿易取引)의 전자화(電子化)" (E-Commerce in the Historical Approach to Usage and Practice of International Trade)

  • 춘홍차
    • 무역상무연구
    • /
    • 제19권
    • /
    • pp.224-242
    • /
    • 2003
  • The author believes that the main task of study in international trade usage and practice is the management of transactional risks involved in international sale of goods. They are foreign exchange risks, transportation risks, credit risk, risk of miscommunication, etc. In most cases, these risks are more serious and enormous than those involved in domestic sales. Historically, the merchant adventurers organized the voyage abroad, secured trade finance, and went around the ocean with their own or consigned cargo until around the $mid-19^{th}$ century. They did business faceto-face at the trade fair or the open port where they maintained the local offices, so-called "Trading House"(商館). Thererfore, the transactional risks might have been one-sided either with the seller or the buyer. The bottomry seemed a typical arrangement for risk sharing among the interested parties to the adventure. In this way, such organizational arrangements coped with or bore the transactional risks. With the advent of ocean liner services and wireless communication across the national border in the $19^{th}$ century, the business of merchant adventurers developed toward the clear division of labor; sales by mercantile agents, and ocean transportation by the steam ship companies. The international banking helped the process to be accelerated. Then, bills of lading backed up by the statute made it possible to conduct documentary sales with a foreign partner in different country. Thus, FOB terms including ocean freight and CIF terms emerged gradually as standard trade terms in which transactional risks were allocated through negotiation between the seller and the buyer located in different countries. Both of them did not have to go abroad with their cargo. Instead, documentation in compliance with the terms of the contract(plus an L/C in some cases) must by 'strictly' fulfilled. In other words, the set of contractual documents must be tendered in advance of the arrival of the goods at port of discharge. Trust or reliance is placed on such contractual paper documents. However, the container transport services introduced as international intermodal transport since the late 1960s frequently caused the earlier arrival of the goods at the destination before the presentation of the set of paper documents, which may take 5 to 10% of the amount of transaction. In addition, the size of the container vessel required the speedy transport documentation before sailing from the port of loading. In these circumstances, computerized processing of transport related documents became essential for inexpensive transaction cost and uninterrupted distribution of the goods. Such computerization does not stop at the phase of transportation but extends to cover the whole process of international trade, transforming the documentary sales into less-paper trade and further into paperless trade, i.e., EDI or E-Commerce. Now we face the other side of the coin, which is data security and paperless transfer of legal rights and obligations. Unfortunately, these issues are not effectively covered by a set of contracts only. Obviously, EDI or E-Commerce is based on the common business process and harmonized system of various data codes as well as the standard message formats. This essential feature of E-Commerce needs effective coordination of different divisions of business and tight control over credit arrangements in addition to the standard contract of sales. In a few word, information does not alway invite "trust". Credit flows from people, or close organizational tie-ups. It is our common understanding that, without well-orchestrated organizational arrangements made by leading companies, E-Commerce does not work well for paperless trade. With such arrangements well in place, participating E-business members do not need to seriously care for credit risk. Finally, it is also clear that E-International Commerce must be linked up with a set of government EDIs such as NACCS, Port EDI, JETRAS, etc, in Japan. Therefore, there is still a long way before us to go for E-Commerce in practice, not on the top of information manager's desk.

  • PDF

국제프랜차이징 연구요소 및 연구방향 (Research Framework for International Franchising)

  • 김주영;임영균;심재덕
    • 마케팅과학연구
    • /
    • 제18권4호
    • /
    • pp.61-118
    • /
    • 2008
  • 본 연구는 국내외 프랜차이즈의 해외진출에 대한 연구들을 바탕으로 국제프랜차이징연구의 전체적인 연구체계를 세워보고, 연구체계를 형성하고 있는 연구요인들을 확인하여 각 연구요소별로 이루어지는 연구주제와 내용을 살펴보고, 앞으로의 연구주제들을 제안하고자 한다. 주요한 연구요소들은 국제프랜차이징의 동기 및 환경 요소과 진출의사결정, 국제프랜차이징의 진입양식 및 발전전략, 국제프랜차이징의 운영전략 및 국제프랜차이징의 성과이다. 이외에도 국제프랜차이징 연구에 적용할 수 있는 대리인이론, 자원기반이론, 거래비용이론, 조직학습이론 및 해외진출이론들을 설명하였다. 또한 국제프랜차이징연구에서 보다 중점적으로 개발해야 할 질적, 양적 방법론을 소개하였으며, 마지막으로 국내연구의 동향을 정리하여 추후의 연구방향을 종합적으로 정리하였다.

  • PDF

통합 건설관리 환경과 일관된 정보처리 체계의 구현 (Advanced Construction Management through an Integrated Information Control Environment)

  • 문성우;김용범;김영도
    • 한국건설관리학회:학술대회논문집
    • /
    • 한국건설관리학회 2003년도 학술대회지
    • /
    • pp.137-142
    • /
    • 2003
  • 경제${\cdot}$사회적 개발에 투자할 수 있는 한정된 국가자원을 고려했을 때 공공사업을 위해서 투입되는 자원은 효과적으로 관리되고 배분되어야 한다. 건설관리는 이와 같은 시대적 요구사항에 따라서 건설사업의 최적화라는 개념으로 도입되고 있으며, 통합 건설관리 환경은 정보화 환경의 구현으로 건설관리를 선진화 시킬 수 있는 기틀을 제공한다. 본 논문은 감독원과 시공사가 계약 상의 업무를 추진한 때 생성되는 정보를 통합적으로 관리하는 통합 건설관리 환경의 개발 방안을 제시하는 것을 목적으로 한다. 통할 건설관리는 건설 CALS에서 목표로 하는 발주처, 시공사, 용역사 등을 포함한 건설 e-비즈니스를 구현함으로써 건설사업의 추진 시 정보 처리의 효과를 높이고, 일원화된 정보 처리로 자원의 효과적인 관리가 가능하게 된다. 특히 라이프싸이클 각 단계에서 생성되는 건설정보를 일괄되게 관리하기 위해서 XML을 중심으로 한 데이터의 조회와 저장이 가능하도록 고려해야 하며, 향후 예상되는 건설 B2B 환경에 대응해야 한다. 한국수자원공사의 수자원 건설통합정보관리시스템에서 보여주는 바와 같이 통합 건설관리 환경은 기간 시스템과의 유기적인 연결을 통해서 전략적 기간 시스템으로 설계${\cdot}$구현될 수 있다. 국내 건설사업이 시공 분야에 있어서 갖고 있는 장점을 극대화하기 인해서는 건설관리의 고도화가 필요한 바 통합 건설관리 환경의 도입을 통해서 경쟁력의 획기적인 발전을 도모해야 하겠다.

  • PDF

항공기운항자의 제3자 책임에 관한 면책사유로서의 불가항력 조항에 관한 고찰 - 독일 항공법상의 해석을 중심으로 - (A Study of the Force Majeure as Immunity by 3rd Party Liability of the Aircraft-Operator -With respect to the German Aviation Act-)

  • 김성미
    • 항공우주정책ㆍ법학회지
    • /
    • 제31권1호
    • /
    • pp.37-62
    • /
    • 2016
  • 상법 제931조 4호에 불가항력에 관한 조항은 두가지 문제점을 내포하고 있다. 첫째, 그 적용 범위에 있어 명확하지 않으며, 둘째, 동조 1호의 열거된 면책사유와 불가항력은 중첩적 가능성이 제기될 수 있다. 불가항력이란 자연재해 및 제3자로 인한 외부적 영향에 의한 경우를 뜻한다. 후자의 해석으로 인한, 제3자의 외부적 영향으로 발생한 사건이라는 해석은 굉장히 광범위하고 포괄적인 의미인데, 이는 집행자의 해석에 따라 각각에 적용되기에 그 기준의 명확성에 대해 의심해 볼 여지가 있다. 더욱이 항공기사고로 인한 (지상) 제3자의 손해는 그 발생빈도가 적고, 또한 이는 신설조항으로 그 분석과 적용에 대한 연구는 필요하다. 하여 외부적 행위로 인하여 (지상) 제3자에게 (비계약적) 손해가 발생하였다면, 그 손해의 범위의 기준을 마련하는 것이 법률적용의 명확성에 있어 바람직하지 않을까 사료된다. 불가항력으로 인한 항공기운항자의 면책은 항공기운항자의 산업보호라는 입장에서 필요한 조항이 될 수도 있다. 반대로 이는 언제나 피해자의 보호법익과 상충된다. 하여, 법률적 보호에 있어 가장 우선시 고려해야 할 사항은 누구의 보호법익이 우선적으로 고려되어야 할 것인가 이므로, 기업보호라는 측면도 결코 간과할 수 없는 부분이지만, 예상치 못한 피해를 받은 항공기사고로 인한 (지상) 제3자의 보호는 기업보호에 앞서 담보되어야 할 보호법익이다. 다음으로 중첩적 가능성이란, 상법 제931조의 1호와 4호이다. 1호에 정치, 경제적 이유로 발생된 사건에 대한 면책이라는 규정을 두고 있는데, 이는 4호의 불가항력에 대한 해석과 맞물릴 수 있다. 위에서 설명한대로 불가항력의 해석상, 제3자의 외부적 영향의 원인으로 경치 경제적 이유로 발생되어지는 일련의 사건을 포함한다고 볼 수 있으므로, 이에 대한 중복적 규정이라는 의문이 생긴다. 결론적으로 향후에 발생하게 될 규정의 구체화와 양 당사자 간의 균형있는 보호를 위하여 이에 관한 고려가 필요하다고 사료된다.

국제투자조약상 포괄적 보호조항(Umbrella Clauses)의 해석에 관한 연구 (Interpretation of the Umbrella Clause in Investment Treaties)

  • 조희문
    • 한국중재학회지:중재연구
    • /
    • 제19권2호
    • /
    • pp.95-126
    • /
    • 2009
  • One of the controversial issues in investor-state investment arbitration is the interpretation of "umbrella clause" that is found in most BIT and FTAs. This treaty clause requires on Contracting State of treaty to observe all investment obligations entered into with foreign investors from the other Contracting State. This clause did not receive in-depth attention until SGS v. Pakistan and SGS v. Philippines cases produced starkly different conclusions on the relations about treaty-based jurisdiction and contract-based jurisdiction. More recent decisions by other arbitral tribunals continue to show different approaches in their interpretation of umbrella clauses. Following the SGS v. Philippines decision, some recent decisions understand that all contracts are covered by umbrella clause, for example, in Siemens A.G. v. Argentina, LG&E Energy Corp. v. Argentina, Sempra Energy Int'l v. Argentina and Enron Corp. V. Argentina. However, other recent decisions have found a different approach that only certain kinds of public contracts are covered by umbrella clauses, for example, in El Paso Energy Int'l Co. v. Argentina, Pan American Energy LLC v. Argentina and CMS Gas Transmission Co. v. Argentina. With relation to the exhaustion of domestic remedies, most of tribunals have the position that the contractual remedy should not affect the jurisdiction of BIT tribunal. Even some tribunals considered that there is no need to exhaust contract remedies before bringing BIT arbitration, provoking suspicion of the validity of sanctity of contract in front of treaty obligation. The decision of the Annulment Committee In CMS case in 2007 was an extraordinarily surprising one and poured oil on the debate. The Committee composed of the three respected international lawyers, Gilbert Guillaume and Nabil Elaraby, both from the ICJ, and professor James Crawford, the Rapportuer of the International Law Commission on the Draft Articles on the Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts, observed that the arbitral tribunal made critical errors of law, however, noting that it has limited power to review and overturn the award. The position of the Committee was a direct attack on ICSID system showing as an internal recognition of ICSID itself that the current system of investor-state arbitration is problematic. States are coming to limit the scope of umbrella clauses. For example, the 2004 U.S. Model BIT detailed definition of the type of contracts for which breach of contract claims may be submitted to arbitration, to increase certainty and predictability. Latin American countries, in particular, Argentina, are feeling collectively victims of these pro-investor interpretations of the ICSID tribunals. In fact, BIT between developed and developing countries are negotiated to protect foreign investment from developing countries. This general characteristic of BIT reflects naturally on the provisions making them extremely protective for foreign investors. Naturally, developing countries seek to interpret restrictively BIT provisions, whereas developed countries try to interpret more expansively. As most of cases arising out of alleged violation of BIT are administered in the ICSID, a forum under the auspices of the World Bank, these Latin American countries have been raising the legitimacy deficit of the ICSID. The Argentine cases have been provoking many legal issues of international law, predicting crisis almost coming in actual investor-state arbitration system. Some Latin American countries, such as Bolivia, Venezuela, Ecuador, Argentina, already showed their dissatisfaction with the ICSID system considering withdrawing from it to minimize the eventual investor-state dispute. Thus the disagreement over umbrella clauses in their interpretation is becoming interpreted as an historical reflection on the continued tension between developing and developed countries on foreign investment. There is an academic and political discussion on the possible return of the Calvo Doctrine in Latin America. The paper will comment on these problems related to the interpretation of umbrella clause. The paper analyses ICSID cases involving principally Latin American countries to identify the critical legal issues arising between developing and developed countries. And the paper discusses alternatives in improving actual investor-State investment arbitration; inter alia, the introduction of an appellate system and treaty interpretation rules.

  • PDF

국제물류 계약에서 리스크 공유에 대한 계약서 조항 사례연구 : 국내와 해외 기업 간 비교를 중심으로 (A Case Study on the Risk Sharing Structure of Service Contracts in Global Logistics Outsourcing: Comparison of Korea with Foreign Companies)

  • 김진수;송상화
    • 통상정보연구
    • /
    • 제15권1호
    • /
    • pp.35-65
    • /
    • 2013
  • 2012년 12월 국토해양부와 지식경제부는 화주기업과 물류기업 간 표준계약서를 보급 추진하기 위하여 위원회를 개최하고 표준계약서를 배포하였으며, 이러한 배경 하에 본 연구는 물류아웃소싱의 계약 관계에서 양 업계가 상생거래를 하기위한 물류계약서의 가이드라인을 제시하기 위하여 계약의 유형과 속성에 관한 선행연구를 검토하였고, 국내와 해외의 물류 계약서의 실제 사례 제시를 통하여, 국내의 물류 계약서의 구체화 정도와 해외 계약서들의 구체화 정도를 비교하였으며, 향후 국내 기업이 물류계약서 체결 시 현재보다 더 구체적으로 위험발생 조항이나 비용발생 조항 등을 반영해야 하는 현실적인 시사점을 제공하였다. 분석결과 첫째, 계약서의 구성과 내용은 국내와 해외가 공통적으로 계약의 정의와 기간, 업무의 범위, 업무 처리의 절차, 정산의 방법, 분쟁의 해결 방법과 같이 일반적으로 구성원 간 거래에 필요한 공식적인 원칙을 다루고 있는 것을 알 수 있었으며, 둘째, 국내와 해외의 계약서 모두 상황 발생에 따라 탄력적으로 해결이 가능하도록 규정하고 분쟁이 발생 할 경우 분쟁 기구를 통해 해결을 하는 신고전적 계약법을 따르고 있음을 알 수 있었다. 그리고 셋째, 국내 계약서에 비교하여 해외의 물류 계약서가 발생 가능한 위험에 대비하여 보다 구체적인 조항들을 담고 있는 것을 알수 있었으며, 해외 계약서에 비해 국내의 계약서가 화주기업에 보다 유리한 조항들을 많이 담고 있는 것을 알 수 있었다. 이러한 연구를 통하여 물류기업과 화주기업은 계약사항 협의 단계에서 계약 이후에 발생 가능성이 있는 위험이나 문제점들을 사전 예상하고 상호 협의를 통하여 계약서에 반영하는 것을 적극적으로 노력하여 물류기업과 화주기업과의 구조적인 문제로 발생된 손해를 물류기업에서 감수하는 관행을 없애도록 노력하여야 하는 아이디어를 제공하였고, 향후 표준 물류계약서 배포를 위해 구체적으로 반영이 될 수 있는 정책적인 가이드라인을 제공하였다.

  • PDF