• 한국건축시공학회:학술대회논문집
• /
• 한국건축시공학회 2001년도 학술논문발표회
• /
• pp.93-98
• /
• 2001

If the construction delays are occurred during the project execution, the contractual parties should inquire the delay causes and the contractual obligation. Due to the compensation of damages, the interested parties and the contractual parties are placed on the adverse situation. For reasonable of the claim and dispute, the contractual parties are needed the objective and systematic procedure method to analyze the delay. The purpose of this study is to propose a formal process model considering the case of construction delay-claims.

• 무역학회지
• /
• 제43권5호
• /
• pp.139-158
• /
• 2018

오늘날의 무역구조는 이전보다 훨씬 다변화 되었고, 각국의 수출입액이 늘어남에 따라 무역분쟁의 내용도 훨씬 복잡해지고 있는 것은 물론 분쟁의 수 또한 증가하고 있다. 이러한 분쟁을 해결하는 수단으로서 소송과 중재를 비롯한 협상, 알선, 조정 등이 활용되고 있지만 소송이나 중재에 의한 해결방법은 관할권, 거리상의 제약, 비용과 절차의 복잡성 등 그 어려움이 따른다. 또한 협상이나 알선에 의할 경우, 효력이나 제도상의 미비점 등 그 한계성을 드러내면서 이들을 대체할 수 있는 방법이 요구되어 왔다. 이에 ADR의 한 형태로 등장한 조정은 조정인이 분쟁당사자 사이에서 중립인의 역할을 하면서 당사자가 자주적으로 사건을 해결하도록 돕는 제도이다. 조정은 비밀보장에 의한 신뢰구축, 준거법과 재판관할권의 비적용, 절차의 간이성, 미래지향적인 결과도출이라는 장점이 중점적으로 부각되고 있어 미국, 일본을 비롯한 중국 등에서는 일찍이 무역분쟁의 해결수단으로 이용되고 있다. 하지만 우리나라에서는 아직 조정의 유용성이 널리 알려지지 못하였고, 그 이용 또한 저조한 상태이다. 본고는 조정이 어떠한 제도인지를 설명하는 것과 함께 무역분쟁의 해결수단으로서 조정이 지닌 유용성을 밝힘으로써 향후 분쟁발생 시 본 제도의 적극적 이용을 도모하고자 하는 취지에서 연구를 진행하였다.

• 시큐리티연구
• /
• 제11호
• /
• pp.129-157
• /
• 2006

급속한 사회변화와 함께 사회적 위험요소가 고조되면서 이에 대한 안전문제가 크게 대두되고 있다. 이에 안전욕구의 증대에 따라 위험에 대비하는 치안서비스를 제공하는 민간경호경비에 대한 수요도 증가하고 이에 따른 경호경비업도 발달하고 있다 이에 본고에서는 경호경비계약에 대한 법률 구조를 파악하여 경호경비업자와 의뢰자 사이에 발생 가능한 분쟁을 예방하거나 해결하기 위하여 계약의 성립과 그에 따르는 문제점을 분석하고자 한다. 특히 경호경비관계에 따르는 분쟁을 최소화하기 위하여 경호경비 계약을 체결하여 그 합의내용을 명확히 문서화하는 것이 필요하다. 여기에서 본고에서는 각 당사자간에 자율적으로 체결하는 경호경비계약조건을 표준화하는 방안 중에서 분쟁해결조항의 표준모델을 제시 하고자 한다. 특히 당사자 간 사법상의 분쟁을 해결하는 효과적인 방법으로 합의에 의한 방법이 최선이겠으나, 불가피한 경우에 재판에 의한 소송에 의한 해결보다는 중재를 통한 해결 방안을 권고한다. 당사자가 중재로 분쟁을 해결하기 위해서는 경호경비 계약서에 중재조항을 삽입하여 체결해야 한다. 실제 경호경비업계에서 이데 대한 적용성 시험 및 평가를 거쳐서 이를 경호경비 표준계약서로 제정하여 업계 전반에 확대 적용을 추진하고자 한다.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제20권3호
• /
• pp.121-145
• /
• 2010

In the past, ADR has not been used as frequently in Japan as it has in other parts of the industrialized world. However, though litigation is still the most utilized vehicle of dispute resolution by Japanese financial institutions, this will be changing. The New Financial ADR system, which was created by a June 2009 amendment to the Financial Instruments and Exchange Act, is meant to deal with every stage of financial-related disputes and, as such, strives to resolve disputes before they become significant and acts to ameliorate any post-ADR issues that may remain, thereby completing the FIEA's purpose to protect investors. Since the foundation of the New Financial ADR system applies to all related industries, new provisions were set out in 16 business related acts, such as the Banking Act, the Insurance Business Act, and FIEA itself. October 2010 will mark the formal introduction of a new system of financial ADR in Japan. New Financial ADR in Japan will be modeled on the Financial Ombudsman Service in the United Kingdom, but will not feature one comprehensive dispute resolution system in which one dispute resolution institution covers all disputes in the financial field. The New Financial ADR system is merely one step towards a foundation of comprehensive financial ADR such as FOS. It must be noted, however, that this all important first step was over seven years in the making, involving a great deal of discussion, debate, and compromise amongst many parts of Japanese government, business, and society. The New Financial ADR system grants participating parties the ability to stop the clock on any statute of limitations which may correspond to any future possible court cases related to the dispute,13 and further grants the ability to suspend related court proceedings while the parties are utilizing the New Financial ADR system. In addition, where financial institutions have not accepted dispute resolution proceedings or have not accepted a special conciliation proposal, the Ministry of Finance may issue an order compelling compliance if it is found that certain actions are necessary to ensure the appropriate operations of a financial institution's business. In Japan, as best practices have not yet been created.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제14권2호
• /
• pp.135-172
• /
• 2004

While doing business in China foreign companies occasionally find themselves embroiled in disputes with Chinese individuals, companies or the Chinese Government. There are three primary ways to resolve a commercial dispute in China are negotiation, arbitration and litigation. The best way of dispute resolution is negotiation as it is the least expensive method and the working relationship of both parties concerned in dispute. But negotiations do not always give rise to resolution. Arbitration is the next choice. Unless the parties concerned can agree to resort to arbitration after the dispute has arisen, the underlying contract namely, sales contract or separate agreement must show that disputes will be resolved by arbitration. Agreements to arbitration specify arbitration body and governing law. There are two Chinese government -sponsored arbitration bodies for handling cases involving at least one foreign party: China International Economic and Trade Arbitration Commission(CIETAC) and China Maritime Arbitration Commission(CMAC) for maritime disputes. Contracts regarding foreign companies doing business in China often designate CIETAC arbitration. CIETAC distinguishes between two kinds of dispute resolutions, foreign-related arbitration and domestic arbitration. For a dispute to be classified as foreign-related arbitration, one of the companies must be a foreign entity without a major production facility or investment in China. CIETAC has published rules which govern the selection of a panel if the contract does not specify how the choice of arbitration will be handled. CIETAC's list of arbitrators for foreign-related disputes, from which CIETAC's arbitrators must en chosen, includes may non-Chines arbitrators. But many foreign experts believe that some aspects of CIETAC needs to be improved. The purpose of this paper is to improve the understanding of arbitration in China, CIETAC by way of studying the current situation and improvement of international commercial arbitration in China.

• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제58권
• /
• pp.99-124
• /
• 2013

International commercial arbitration is a specially formed mechanism for the final and binding settlement of disputes arisen between contracting parties regarding procedures, structures or other contractual relationship agreed by them. It is a resolution system which is processed autonomously by arbitrators who are appointed by contracting parties without involving the national court. If the contracting parties want to settle their disputes by arbitration, there must be a valid agreement. With a valid agreement, the most important concern is which law(called as the substantive law) should be applied in order to determine the rights and obligations of both contracting parties in relation to the dispute. At this point, the substantive law is really important because it is applied to the dispute itself directly during proceedings as well as it plays an crucial role in scrutiny and enforcement of arbitral awards. This article discusses about the substantive law under international commercial arbitration, specially focusing on the regulations of the ICC rules of arbitration, which is the most widely used all over the world and UNCITRAL Model law, which most countries' rule and laws are based on. By discussing how these rules and regulations should be interpreted and applied, it is expected to provide practical help to practitioners when they agree on an arbitration agreement.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제31권2호
• /
• pp.23-46
• /
• 2021

Sports disputes have specific characteristics compared to disputes that arise in the field of commerce. One particularity is the judicial system in which the CAS plays a key role as the International Supreme Court for sports-related matters. The CAS Code applies whenever the parties agree to submit a sports-related dispute to the CAS(Art. R27). Once the parties to the arbitration agreement have decided that the CAS Code should govern their proceedings. The parties' autonomy is, however, limited to the provisions of the CAS Code that provide for such a corresponding autonomy. The application of the mandatory rules contained in the CAS Code cannot be excluded. In CAS appeals arbitration proceedings, the Panel shall decide the dispute according to the applicable sports regulations and, subsidiarily, to the rules of law chosen by the parties(Art. R58). In international sports disputes, the uniform application and interpretation of the relevant regulations are essential. Therefore, Art. R58 should be applied as a mandatory rule without any changes. Regulations of the sports organizations are to be qualified as valid rules of law. CAS panels may also apply the so-called lex sportiva to the merits before considering statutory provisions of national jurisdictions. In this way, the specificities in (international) sports disputes can be taken into account without the need to further examine the application of national legal standards.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제26권1호
• /
• pp.3-27
• /
• 2016

There is a need for disputes in sports to be settled by arbitration rather than a court ruling, taking the unique characteristics of sports into consideration. Arbitration is a form of alternative dispute resolution (ADR). A dispute resolution system is regarded as: an arbitrator is selected by the agreement between the parties, and a binding decision is made, which the parties obey, consequently resulting in a final resolution. To resolve a dispute upon arbitration, there must be an arbitration agreement upon the free will of the parties. In relation to the arbitration agreement, however, there are some cases in which sports organizations have an arbitration clause in the articles of association, regulations or player registration application that call for settling disputes by arbitration. In such cases, the validity of the arbitration agreement may create doubt whether or not this sort of arbitration has been made by mutual agreement. Consequently this is required to be legally examined. The activities of a sports organization are recognized as part of private autonomy, and they include even the rights that establish regulations or rules. Nonetheless, the powers that such sport organizations are able to establish are not allowed without limit. However, sports activities and autonomy shall be protected as themselves. Therefore, if we give priority to arbitration upon the independent arbitrator and fair process by establishing an independent arbitral organization in charge of sports disputes to handle the effective resolution of disputes and protect sports autonomy and ask for a court decision if one party disobeys the arbitration, or the sports arbitration prepositive principle, it seems helpful to resolve the unfairness of compulsory jurisdiction and the clause for sports arbitration and protect the player's right of choice and of claims for trial.

• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제57권
• /
• pp.79-108
• /
• 2013

International transactions of plant and construction project need to time to time for completing the contract. During the performing the contract there may arise many claims and disputes it should be settled rapidly for processing schedule of works. However, arbitration and litigation for settlement of dispute are inappropriate in time and expense under the specifications of plant and construction project. Dispute boards are one of the successful resolution method of dispute prior to litigation or arbitration. If the dispute board was failed, of course, it may be allowed to continue into litigation or arbitration. As the creative methods of parties agreement, dispute boards may be expected to avoid claims and dispute in long and medium international contract. The purpose of this paper is to explore the specification and limitations of dispute boards that may clear disputes under long and medium contract of construction and procurement. It needs to be understand to determine whether is the useful methods for resolving dispute in the international project. This paper considers the specific natures of dispute board and its rules, procedures and problems including ICC and FIDIC for the contract of long and medium transaction.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제11권1호
• /
• pp.217-245
• /
• 2001

Like traditional commerce, disputes are bound to arise in the course of conducting an e-commerce transaction. At present of June 30, 2001, 259 cases of dispute on e-commerce have been applied for the mediation of Electronic Transaction Dispute Mediation Committee, types of them are 170 cases of delayed delivery of commodity, 21 cases of contract cancellation and refund, 16 cases of personal information protection, 16 cases of false and exaggerated advertisement, 14 cases of commodity defect. The settlement systems of e-commerce dispute are litigation and Alternative Dispute Resolution(ADR). ADR encompasses mediation, arbitration, and similar private tools for resolving disputes. ADR offers many perceived advantages. Speed of resolution and low cost are often cited as the primary benefits. Therfore e-commerce disputes may be settled more effectively by litigation. The settlement systems of e-commerce dispute by ADR are the mediation of Electronic Transaction Dispute Mediation Committee, the mediation of Consumer Dispute Mediation Commercial Arbitration Board, and the arbitration of Korean Commerical Arbitration Board. E-commerce sets up the probability that its merchants and customers will not exist in the same legal jurisdictions. The confusing application of laws and wide geographical dispersion of these parties will necessitate a faster and cheaper dispute resolution methodology. Therefore, online ADR may be effective for e-commerce dispute resolution. The examples of online ADR opetation are the cyber mediation of Electronic Transaction Dispute Resolution Committee, the cyber mediation of Korean Commercial Arbitration Board, the cyber mediation of Click N Settle, the online ADR of BBB online, and the cyber arbitration of virtual Magistrate.