• The Journal of Fisheries Business Administration
• /
• v.43 no.1
• /
• pp.63-74
• /
• 2012

The Korean Conflict of Laws Act recently incorporated much of the European Union's recent revision in "EC Convention on the Law Applicable to Contractual Obligations (Rome 1980)"(hereinafter Rome Convention). With the revision of Rome Convention applied to contractual obligations,"Regulation (EC) No 593/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 June 2008 on the law applicable to contractual obligations (Rome I)"(hereinafter Rome I) has taken effect on December 2009. Before the effectivation of Rome I, "Regulation (EC) No 864/2007 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 July 2007 on the law applicable to non-contractual obligations (Rome II)"(hereinafter Rome II) has come into effect on January 2009. This means the revision of certain rules and its practical implications need an in-depth study on governing law rules under Rome I which provides newly effected governing laws applicable to contractual obligations. Moreover, uniform choice of law rules on non-contractual obligations needs to focus especially on marine insurance contract. Where policy assignment and subrogation causes, how to decide the governing law which will be applied to the insurer as a third party? This article attempts to analyze emerging legal issues in legal regimes determining choice of law, especially those in international marine insurance contracts. This will help Korean practitioners to be dialed in legal affairs under English Law as the governing law in their contracts.

• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.37
• /
• pp.3-33
• /
• 2008

This study primarily concerns the seller's duty to deliver the goods in conformity with the contract under the United Nations Convention on International Sale of Goods(1980) in comparison with the Draft Principles of European Sales Law. It describes and analyzes the provisions of the CISG as to the seller's duty, focusing on main controversial issues among scholars in their application. It also attempts to compare the rules of the CISG with those of the Draft PESL and to evaluate them in light of the discipline of comparative law. This is for the purpose of facilitating the systematic development and reform of one jurisdiction by any solution from the other jurisdiction found by the comparative study. In addition, this study provides legal and practical advice to the contracting parties when they intends to insert the CISG or the Draft PESL in their contract as a governing law. The comparative study particularly focuses on the following aspects; first, requirements for conformity with the contract which deals with the concept of conformity with the contract, contractual requirements agreed between contractual parties, and implied requirements otherwise not agreed between contractual parties, second, the time when the goods must be in conformity with the contract, third, exclusions of the seller's duty to deliver the goods in conformity with the contract.

• Proceedings of the KIEE Conference
• /
• 2001.07a
• /
• pp.527-529
• /
• 2001

Interfaces are the point of interconnection between distributed generation and the energy infrastructure. These interfaces are generally physical but can include a market dimension as well. While there are issues surrounding various interfaces, the most important issues in the short term are on the electrical interface. Much of the discussion and debate surrounding distributed generation interconnection has centered on technical issues. However, there are two elements of Interconnection that merit equal consideration-process and contractual issues. The solution of distributed generation Interconnection issues depends on whether existing requirements can be modified to make them more efficient, transparent, and standardized while maintaining the grid's reliability and safety. In this paper, two main courses, standardization and third party participation, are suggested for the resolution of these issues.

• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.9 no.1
• /
• pp.115-137
• /
• 1999

The UNCITRAL, during its thirty-two session in 1999 discussed certain issues and problems identified in interactional commercial arbitration practice. The issues discussed include certain aspects if conciliation proceedings ; the legislative requirement of a written form for the arbitration agreement ; arbitability ; soverign immunity ; consolidation of more than one case into one arbitral proceedings ; confidentiality of information in arbitral proceedings ; rasing claims in arbitral proceedings for the purpose of set-off ; decisions by "turncated" arbitral tribunals liability of arbitrators ; power by the arbitral tribunal to award interest ; costs of arbitral proceedings ; enforceability of interim measures of protection ; and discretion to enforce an award that has been set aside in the state of origin. Among those issues discussed, most of States agreed that the issues relating to certain aspects of conciliation proceedings ; the legislative requirement of a written form for the arbitration agreement ; enforceability of interim measures of protection ; and discretion to enforce an award that has been set aside in the State of origin should have priority over other issues. The UNCITRAL may wish to consider the desirability of preparing uniform provisions on any of those issues, possibly indicating whether further work should be towards a legislative text (such as a model legislative provision or a treaty) or a non-legislative text (such as a model contractual rule).

• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.63
• /
• pp.63-88
• /
• 2014

The culpa in contrahendo is a doctrine that "damages should be recoverable against the party whose blameworthy conduct during negotiations for a contract brought about its invalidity or prevented its perfection". In China, Chinese Civil law gradually adopted Culpa in Contrahendo under the former 'economic contract law' and the 'general rules of the civil law', then the legal system of culpa in contrahendo was formally established under Contract Law of the People's Republic of China(CLPRC) in 1999. To put it concretely, Art. 42, 43, 58 of the Chinese Civil Law expressly establishes a culpa in contrahendo liability derived from a principle of good faith governing pre-contractual negotiations. however, in general, culpa in contrahendo has been recognized a independent legal liability as distinct from contractual default liability and torts liability. This article provides a general description of the characteristics of culpa in contrahendo under Chinese Contract Law, and both theoretical issues that have arisen in Chinese academics and relevant important precedent in Chinese Courts. This article also analyzed trend of judgment on precedents that the Supreme Peoples's Court of the PRC applied culpa in contrahendo.

• The Journal of the Korea Contents Association
• /
• v.19 no.10
• /
• pp.630-640
• /
• 2019

A series of recent events have laid the groundwork for discussions on the safety issues regarding production staff in the popular culture industry. In Korea, the standard contract has been pursued as a means of dealing with issues involving popular culture production staff. However, the existing standard contract failed to incorporate the characteristics and requirements in today's market, which greatly restricted its efficacy in real-world cases. Therefore, this study seeks to significantly improve the provisions in the standard contract that govern obligations between contractual parties, and the work safety of the production staff. To this end, considering the main causes of safety accidents and actual contracts, this study groups contractual provisions into several categories: the removal of adverse factors affecting optimal competency, factors causing individual staff's negligence, and external factors causing negligence. Then, this study proposes specific provisions to be included in each category.

• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.22 no.2
• /
• pp.53-77
• /
• 2012

Competence-competence refers to an arbitratorpower to determine whether he or she has jurisdiction to decide a controversy. Although arbitrators power to rule on their own jurisdiction is generally recognized throughout the world, in the United States, neither the courts nor legislative bodies have recognized its significance or the reasoning behind its widespread adoption. Section 3 of the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) is notorious among arbitration statues for its failure to incorporate competence-competence. When courts rule on an issue of competence-competence, it is referred to as a question of who decides the arbitrability of the case. In the United States, the use of competence-competence as a term of art is still limited to scholarly writings. The answer to the competence-competence inquiry is found in an interpretation of section 3 of the FAA which empowers the courts to decide arbitrability issues. The cases of the Supreme Court and most commentators interpreted sections 2 and 3 of the FAA as conferring issues of arbitrability on the federal courts, including the ability to rule on the validity and scope of the arbitral agreement. Traditionally, United States courts have denied the competence-competence to arbitral tribunal. Recently, however, they have confounded the rules by placing primary importance on the arbitration agreement between the parties. The Supreme Court, in a series of cases, has underscored the necessity of giving full effect to the intentions of the parties as expressed in their agreement to arbitrate. The result of the Supreme Court's emphasis on contractualism in determining the issue of arbitrability is most evident in the Courtdecision in the First Options case. Under First Options, courts are to decide arbitrability issues unless there is a clear and unmistakable contractual assignment of these issues to the tribunal itself. The Court is appraised that it has attempted to compromise between contractual freedom in the arbitration setting and the rule of law that is necessary in a society that depends on the concept of ordered liberty. In the decision in Howsam, the Court clarified the definition of arbitrability by attempting to draw a clear line between questions of arbitrability that are to be decided by courts and those matters that bear on the allocation of decisions between courts and arbitrators but are not questions of arbitrability.

• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.21 no.1
• /
• pp.73-86
• /
• 2011

Today's arbitrations see themselves as the most effective scheme for dispute resolution in a variety of transactional context. While some kind of ADR system was already introduced in Korea as of 2007 with revision of the Consumer Basic Law, consumers' needs in dispute resolution remain unmet. Recently one consumer arbitration case divides the U.S. Supreme Court. Of course, the result of the case is expected to affect tens of millions of arbitration agreements in the States which has the most developed scheme in consumer arbitrations. While Arbitration clauses in adhesion contracts are not automatically held to be substantively unconscionable, Class action waivers are one of the most controversial issues in consumer arbitration. In this study, with the theoretical background of consumer arbitrations general, and contractual defenses against adhesive contracts, reviewed are U.S. federal courts' attitudes toward certain consumer arbitration agreements including the class arbitration waiver. Moreover, several issues in AT&T case are examined for practical implications for consumer dispute resolution. All of these are expected to initiate further research to find some guidelines for the proper status and operation of consumer arbitration here in Korea.

• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.18 no.2
• /
• pp.149-171
• /
• 2008

The purpose of this paper is to examine the Measures against Risks in International Investment Agreement: focusing on Umbrella Clause and MIGA. Umbrella Clauses have become a regular feature of international investment agreements and have been included to provide additional protection to investors by covering the contractual obligations in investment agreements between host countries and foreign investors. The meaning of umbrella clauses is one of the most controversial issues with which international arbitral tribunals have been recently confronted with while adjudicating investment disputes brought before them MIGA issues guarantees against non-commercial risks for investments, such as: currency transfer restrictions, expropriations, war and civil disturbances and breach of contract by host governments, and the case that the investor obtains an arbitration award or judical decision for damages and is unable to enforce it after a specified period. Furthermore, MIGA undertakes a wide range of mediation activities designed to remove obstacles to the flow of foreign direct investment in its developing member countries.

• International Journal of Computer Science & Network Security
• /
• v.21 no.12spc
• /
• pp.544-548
• /
• 2021

Scientific and technical development, as well as the emergence of new types of contracts, which do not have their expression in current legislation, force us to explore the issues of contract law to adapt to change. In this context, the principle of freedom of contract is fundamental, which states that each person has the right to enter into a contractual relationship at his discretion. However, such freedom is not absolute, because the freedom of one person should not violate the freedom of another. Together with the conflict of private and public interests, these phenomena are a field for the study of topical issues of theory and application of the principle of freedom of contract in practice. Research methods are philosophical, general scientific, and special scientific methods, in particular, system-structural, formal-legal, hermeneutic; methods of analysis, synthesis, etc. As a result of the research, the main characteristics of the principle of freedom of contract, its role for private law regulation of contract law are given; approaches to understanding the restriction of contract freedom are analyzed; typical examples and means of such restrictions are identified; demonstrated how contract freedom is embodied in the use of IT tools, which types of contracts are most common in the digital environment.