• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제30권3호
• /
• pp.137-167
• /
• 2020

As arbitration is widely used as an alternative dispute resolution mechanism, third-party funding, which is a person or entity with no prior interest in the legal dispute providing non-recourse financing for one of the parties, has become more prevalent with increasing costs of international arbitration. In particular, Hong Kong and Singapore are the first jurisdictions to adopt and implement legislations to specifically permit third-party funding of international arbitration. Thus, in this article, relevant issues with respect to third-party funding of arbitration, such as, conflicts of interest, disclosure, privilege and confidentiality of information, cost allocation, security for costs, and control over arbitral proceedings by the third-party funder are examined with pertinent provisions of the recent legislations. While the respective legislations of Hong Kong and Singapore may not directly address every issue raised by third-party funding of arbitration, as they make it clear that such is no longer prohibited by the old common law doctrines of champerty and maintenance, they have clarified conflicting case law as well as proactively promoted themselves as leading seats of international arbitration.

• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제49권
• /
• pp.257-281
• /
• 2011

The duty of utmost good faith is found in sections 17-20 of MIA 1906. Critics of the current legal regime on the pre-contractual duty from the viewpoint of the assured, have been concentrated on two points in particular. First, the scope of the duty is so wide that it imposes too high burden on the assured. The second criticism is directed at the remedy, prescribed by the MIA 1906, s.17, against breach of the duty. This article intends to analyse the legal implications of proposals in CP 2007 for reforming pre-contractual duty of utmost good faith of business assured in English insurance contracts law and the problems of proposals. The Law Commissions are proposing four fundamental changes to meet the long-standing criticism and the results of analysis are as following. First, the Law Commissions are proposing a change in the test of constructive knowledge in relation to the duty of disclosure so that a business assured will be obliged to disclose facts which he knows or a reasonable ought to know in the circumstances. Secondly, deviating from the current legal position, the Law Commissions are proposing that if a business assured has made a misrepresentation, but the assured honestly and reasonably believe what it said to be true, the insurer should not have any remedy due to the misrepresentation. The proposal is designed to protect the reasonable expectations of business assured at the pre-contractual stage. Thirdly, the Law Commissions are proposing to change the test for materiality by replacing the "prudent insurer" test by a "reasonable assured" test. The proposed test would focus on the question of what a reasonable assured in the circumstances would think what is relevant to the judgment of the insurer. Finally, the Law Commissions are proposing flexible remedies in case of the breach of the duty. The Law Commissions are proposing no remedy when an assured is acting honestly and reasonably, while avoidance in case of dishonesty. On the other hand, The Law Commissions seem to have an intention to introduce a compensatory remedy in case of negligent breach of the duty.

• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제14권
• /
• pp.103-152
• /
• 2000

English contract law has traditionally taken the view that it is not the duty of the parties to a contract to give information voluntarily to each other. In English law, one of the principal distinctions between insurance contract law and general contract law is the existence of the doctrine of utmost good faith in insurance law. The doctrine gives rise to a variety of duties, some of which apply before formation of the contract while others apply post-formation. This article is, therefore, designed to analyse the overall structure and problems of the doctrine of utmost good faith in English marine insurance law. The results of analysis are as following : First, the requirement of utmost good faith in marine insurance law arises from the fact that many of the relevant circumstances are within the exclusive knowledge of the assured and it is impossible for the insurer to obtain the facts to make a appropriate calculation of the risk that he is asked to assume without this information. Secondly, the duty of utmost good faith provided in MIA 1906, s. 17 has the nature as a bilateral or reciprocal, overriding and absolute duty. Thirdly, the Court of Appeal in Skandia held that breach of the pre-formation duty of utmost good faith did not sound in damages since the duty did not arise out of an implied contractual term and the breach did not constitute a tort. Instead, the Court of Appeal held that the duty was an extra-contractual duty imposed by law in the form of a contingent condition precedent to the enforceability of the contract. Fourthly, the scope of the duty of utmost good faith is closely related to the test of materiality and the assured is required to disclose only material circumstances subject to MIA 1906, s. 18(1) and 20(1). The test of materiality, which had caused a great deal of debate in English courts over 30 years, was finally settled by the House of Lords in Pan Atlantic and the House of Lords rejected the 'decisive influence' test and the 'increased risk' test, and the decision of the House of Lords is thought to accept the 'mere influence' test in subsequent case by the Court of Appeal. Fifthly, the insurer is, in order to avoid contract, required to provide proof that he is induced to enter into the contract by reason of the non-disclosure or misrepresentation of the assured. Sixthly, the duty of utmost good faith is, in principle, terminated before contract is concluded, but it is undoubtful that the provision under MIA 1906, s. 17 is wide enough to include the post-formation duty. The post-formation duty is, however, based upon the terms of marine insurance contract, and the duty lies entirely outside s. 17. Finally, MIA 1906, s. 17 provides expressly for the remedy of avoidance of the contract for breach of the duty. This means rescission or retrospective avoidance of the entire contract, and the remedy is based upon a fairly crude 'all-or-nothing' approach. What is needed in English marine insurance law is to introduce a more sophiscated or proportionate remedy.

• 기록학연구
• /
• 제13호
• /
• pp.135-178
• /
• 2006

정보제공에 대한 공공기관의 대응은 기록관리의 정비가 정보공개제도의 시행에 앞서 실천되어야 할 중요한 과제라는 것을 확인시켜 주었다. 특히, 주요 정보가 포함된 기록에 대한 공공기관의 정보 부존재, 비공개 및 비밀 처분의 남발은 공공기관에서의 기록관리에 대한 전반적인 의식변화는 물론 비공개나 비밀로 관리되는 기록에 대한 근본적인 개선이 시급함을 보여주었다. 본 연구는 이러한 문제의식에 근거하여 현재의 비공개 및 비밀기록 관리의 실태를 검토하고 이에 대한 개선방안을 제안하였다. 지금까지 비공개 및 비밀기록에 대한 연구는 법적,행정적 관점에서만 논의가 진행되어 주로 제도적인 측면만이 부각되었다. 그러나 이러한 논의는 비공개 및 비밀기록의 문제에 대한 본질적인 접근이 되지 못하는 한계가 있다. 비공개 및 비밀로 분류되는 정보는 결국 기록이 생산되는 시점부터 관리까지의 모든 프로세스가 합리적으로 수행되어야만 근본적인 개선이 이루어 질 수 있기 때문이다. 따라서 본 연구에서는 우리의 기록관리체계가 처리과, 자료관, 전문관리기관이라는 세 단계로 구분되어 기록의 라이프사이클 흐름을 적용하여 관리할 수 있는 방식을 취하고 있는 만큼 이러한 단계에 따라 비공개 및 비밀기록의 생산부터 활용에 이르기까지의 전반적인 문제를 살펴보고 그에 대한 개선방향을 제시하였다.

• 항공우주정책ㆍ법학회지
• /
• 제23권2호
• /
• pp.137-172
• /
• 2008

미국에서 자기비판적 분석의 법리에 의한 특권과 면제 이미 항공분야에서도 도입되고 있으나 일관성이 결여되어 있다. FDRs 프로그램은 FAA 또는 항공사에 의한 제제로 부터 공식적으로 보호되지는 아니한다. CVRs 프로그램의 경우 FAA는 집행조치를 위하여 그 데이터를 이용할 수 없으며 공개와 민사소송에서의 개시를 제한하고 있다. 따라서, CVRs은 FDR보다 높은 보호를 받고 있다. ASRS는 최초의 비자동적(non-self-disclosure) 보고시스템이며, 사고 또는 범죄에 관한 정보이외에는 FAA가 집행조치를 취할 수 없다. 다만, 비처벌 요건으로 규정하고 있는 "inadvertent and not deliberate)의 해석을 둘러싸고 FAA, NTSB 및 법원은 일관된 해석 기준이 없는 것으로 보이며, 데이터의 항공사의 징계조치에의 이용, 소송 당사자 또는 대중매체에의 공개 문제를 명확하게 다루고 있지 않다. 1990년대초 ASAP을 시범적으로 개시하였으며 FAA 집행조치 및 회사 징계조치로부터의 면제를 규정하고 있다. FOQA 프로그램은 1995년 시범프로그램을 통하여 최초로 시행되었으며 FAA 집행조치로 부터 면제되지만, 회사의 징계조치로부터의 면제에 대해서는 아무런 규정이 없다. 이러한 점은 ASAP와는 대비된다 할 수 있으며 노조협약에 의하여 FOQA 데이터에 근거한 회사의 징계조치를 배제시킬 수 있을 것이다. ASAP 및 FOQA의 데이터는 모두 2003년 FAA Order 8000.81에 의하여 공개되지 아니한다. 현재, ICAO의 움직임을 보더라도 국제사회에는 항공안전데이터를 보고한 자에 대한 보호의 강화에 대한 컨센서스가 형성되고 있으며 많은 국가들이 관련법을 시행하고 있다. 우리나라의 경우 현재, 항공법 제49조에 의하여 항공안전관리시스템을 도입하도록 되어 있다. 단계적으로 ASAP 또는 QOQA 등과 같은 프로그램의 입법화가 필요하다고 본다. 이와 더불어 미국에서와 같이 집행조치와 징계조치의 면제 규정 및 비공개 특권에 관하여 보다 구체적인 기준을 정하여 입법화하는 것도 필요할 것이다.

• 한국컴퓨터정보학회논문지
• /
• 제25권5호
• /
• pp.209-216
• /
• 2020

형사사건에 있어서 피해자와의 합의는 물론 피해보상을 위하여 공탁부분은 양형자료에 반영되기 때문에 상당히 중요하다. 현행법상 공탁을 하려면 피공탁자의 이름과 주소, 주민등록번호 등을 기재해야 한다. 그런데 피공탁자가 성범죄 피해자 등인 경우 사건기록에서 개인정보가 모두 익명처리되기 때문에 가해자 측은 어려움을 겪는다. 물론 이는 피해자가 가해자와의 합의할 의사가 전혀 없는데도 인적사항을 파악하여 합의를 부치기거나 위협하는 등 가해자로부터 2차 피해를 방어하기 위한 조치이지만 가해자가 자신의 범죄를 뉘우치고 피해자에게 보상하려고 해도 피해자의 인적사항을 몰라 공탁하지 못하는 경우가 생긴다. 에스크로 제도를 활용하면 피해자의 입장에서는 가해자와 직접 접촉을 피하고 개인정보 유출을 막으면서도 실질적인 피해회복을 받을 수 있어서 좋고 가해자의 입장에서는 능력이 닿는 한도에서 잘못에 대해 속죄하는 모습을 보여줄 수 있어서 좋은 제도라고 생각한다.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제26권2호
• /
• pp.45-66
• /
• 2016

The FAA provides that a district court may make an order vacating an arbitration award upon the application of any party to the arbitration where there was evident partiality on the arbitrator's behalf. The U.S. Supreme Court in the case of Commonwealth Coatings Corp. held that arbitrators must disclose to the parties "any dealing that might create an impression of possible bias." Justice White attempted to limit the scope of evident partiality to instances where an arbitrator has a "substantial interest" in the dispute before disclosure is required. The Second Circuit held that if an arbitrator thinks that a nontrivial conflict of interest might exist, the arbitrator must either (i) conduct an investigation into the potential conflict, or (ii) disclose to the parties why he or she thinks there could be a conflict. Further, the arbitrator must disclose his or her intent not to investigate the matter. By utilizing a reasonable impression of partiality standard, the Ninth Circuit held that evident partiality can exist despite an arbitrator's actual acknowledgement of a conflict, and if an arbitrator fails to discharge his or her duty to investigate potential conflicts of interest, his or her constructive knowledge of the conflicts can give rise to evident partiality.

• 의료법학
• /
• 제13권1호
• /
• pp.359-395
• /
• 2012

In a broad term, health and medical data means all patient information that has been generated or circulated in government health and medical policies, such as medical research and public health, and all sorts of health and medical fields as well as patients' personal data, referred as medical data (filled out as medical record forms) by medical institutions. The kinds of health and medical data in medical records are prescribed by Articles on required medical data and the terms of recordkeeping in the Enforcement Decree of the Medical Service Act. As EMR, OCS, LIS, telemedicine and u-health emerges, sharing and protecting digital health and medical data is at issue in these days. At medical institutions, health and medical data, such as medical records, is classified as "sensitive information" and thus is protected strictly. However, due to the circulative property of information, health and medical data can be public as well as being private. The legal grounds of health and medical data as such are based on the right to informational self-determination, which is one of the fundamental rights derived from the Constitution. In there, patients' rights to refuse the collection of information, to control recordkeeping (to demand access, correction or deletion) and to control using and sharing of information are rooted. In any processing of health and medical data, such as generating, recording, storing, using or disposing, privacy can be violated in many ways, including the leakage, forgery, falsification or abuse of information. That is why laws, such as the Medical Service Act and the Personal Data Protection Law, and the Guideline for Protection of Personal Data at Medical Institutions (by the Ministry of Health and Welfare) provide for technical, physical, administrative and legal safeguards on those who handle personal data (health and medical information-processing personnel and medical institutions). The Personal Data Protection Law provides for the collection, use and sharing of personal data, and the regulation thereon, the disposal of information, the means of receiving consent, and the regulation of processing of personal data. On the contrary, health and medical data can be inspected or delivered of the copies, based on the principle of restriction on fundamental rights prescribed by the Constitution. For instance, Article 21(Access to Record) of the Medical Service Act, and the Personal Data Protection Law prescribe self-disclosure, the release of information by family members or by laws, the exchange of medical data due to patient transfer, the secondary use of medical data, such as medical research, and the release of information and the release of information required by the Personal Data Protection Law.

• 한국산업보건학회지
• /
• 제33권3호
• /
• pp.265-272
• /
• 2023

Objectives: Since the material safety data sheets(MSDS) submission and non-disclosure review system was introduced in January 2021, the implementation status of MSDS for chemical manufacturing and importing workplaces being supervised for the first time. Methods: A supervisory team consisting of two labor inspectors and one from the Korea Occupational Safety and Health Agency directly visited the selected workplaces to check compliance with the MSDS system as a whole. Results: As a result of supervising 214 chemical substance manufacturing/importing workplaces, a total of 241 violations of the law were found in 121 workplaces, or 57% of them. In response, the Ministry of Employment and Labor took legal action on 8 cases in 6 locations, imposed a fines totaling of 249.69 million won on 120 chemical handling workplaces, and took action to correct the violations immediately. Conclusions: Major violations were in the order of non-request for warning signs, non-submission of MSDS, non-execution of MSDS training, and non-posting of MSDS. This shows the reality that employers who handle chemical substances are sufficiently communicating chemical information to workers. In the future, the government will actively implement preparation and submission support and system guidance for the implementation of the MSDS system, while making efforts to ensure that the MSDS system works well in the field through thorough on-site supervision in the future.

• 한국프랜차이즈경영연구
• /
• 제5권1호
• /
• pp.143-160
• /
• 2014

본 연구는 창업희망자들이 프랜차이즈 계약 체결 시 우수한 프랜차이즈 본부를 선별하여 판단할 수 있는 자료로 활용하도록 주안점을 두었다. 프랜차이즈 계약과 관련하여 창업자들이 가장 먼저 우려하는 부분은 '과연 내가 선택하는 브랜드가 안전하고, 믿을 만한 것인가' 하는 것이다. 이에 프랜차이즈 본부의 전반적인 현황을 제시하고 있는 정보공개서 분석과 300개 프랜차이즈 가맹점주를 표본으로 조사하였다. 선행연구를 통해 프랜차이즈계약의 결정요인이 도출되었으며, SPSS 18.0을 이용하여 프랜차이즈 계약결정요인이 성별, 업태별, 점포규모별, 소득 간에 차이가 있는지가 분석되었다. 분석 결과, 프랜차이즈 계약 시 가장 중요하게 보는 항목은 영업관리 항목이며, 성별, 점포규모, 소득은 프랜차이즈 계약결정요인에서 유의한 차이가 없었지만, 업태에 따라서는 비용과 교육관리 항목에서 차이가 있는 것으로 나타났다. 본 연구의 결과는 프랜차이즈 본부가 제공하는 정보제공의 수준을 창업자가 판단하여, 프랜차이즈 계약 시 귀중한 자료로 활용하여 성공창업에 도움이 될 것으로 기대된다. 또한, 프랜차이즈 사업자간의 협력적 관계를 더욱 확고히 하고, 이를 통해 중장기적인 비전 제시을 위한 지침이 될 수 있을 것이다. 마지막으로, 본 연구의 결과는 유망하고 우수한 프랜차이즈 본부의 육성과 가맹 사업거래의 공정화에 관한 법률, 가맹사업 진흥에 관한 법률의 제도적 미비점을 보완, 프랜차이즈 분야를 더욱 증진시킬 수 있는 밑거름이 될 것으로 보인다.