• Title/Summary/Keyword: Dispute Settlements

Search Result 15, Processing Time 0.016 seconds

A Study on the Comparative Method of Arbitration Law of China and Arbitration Law of Mongolia (중국의 중재법과 몽골의 중재법에 대한 비교법적 고찰)

  • Kim, Yong-Kil
    • Journal of Arbitration Studies
    • /
    • v.26 no.4
    • /
    • pp.83-109
    • /
    • 2016
  • Recently, China has brought many political, economical, and ideological changes in order to complete the "socialistic market economy." In terms of legal system, they make much effort to seek compatibility and stability of law and order. China recognizes that the breakdown of corruption, which is rampant in society, is an essential short-cut for national development. To realize anti-corruption reformation, it strengthens the supervision of relatives and close officials of high-ranking government officials. Recently, China has suffered from expanded trade disputes internationally and has also experienced severe management-labor conflicts domestically due to economic recession. From 2012 onward, civil lawsuit and other litigations have increased sharply. Also, they face severe conflicts in the land system. It is expected that many disputes arise due to speculation on rural housing. Meanwhile, Mongolia expands the size of trade with Korea in mutual cooperation since their diplomatic relation in 1990 by entering more than 20 treaties and agreements. As Mongolia has rich natural resources and Korea is equipped with advanced science and technology, the two countries have opportunities to develop mutually beneficial cooperative relations. Recently, the arbitration system has attracted attention instead of litigation as a means of dispute settlement in line with the expansion of trade between Korea and Mongolia. This study would be helpful to figure out desirable methods for dispute settlements in case of trade disputes among Korean companies that would advance into China and Mongolia.

ADR in IP Dispute (ADR에서의 지적재산권분쟁 - 중재$\cdot$조정중심으로 -)

  • Yun Sun-Hee
    • Journal of Arbitration Studies
    • /
    • v.13 no.1
    • /
    • pp.125-167
    • /
    • 2003
  • ADR program is designed to solve the problem such as the increase of suits and decision delayed. ADR program has the several significances, decreasing inappropriate cost as time and burden of courts, providing an approachable measure of relief and more efficient tool for settlement of dispute. Particularly ADR program satisfies the needs Intellectual property disputes need specialists that are versed in the subjected problem and, need to be souled quickly in confidence. And parties concerned are not good at the strict judicial procedure in courts, At this point, ADR program holds some advantages over court proceeding for intellectual property disputes. Specialists can be selected as arbitrators or mediator; Cofidentiality may be preserved; Flexibility allows settlement based on mutual commercial interests; Single solution is possible for multiple disputes involving parties from different countries. However, ADR program has not been properly used in. Korea, which is due to not only the lack of understanding the ADR program, but the poor number of filings and settlements. Intermediaries are not professional and also they do not take active hands in disputes. Sometimes, their fairness is asked as peacemakers. Eventually, it is said that this program is not enough to settle international disputes. To activate the ADR program, we can propose the ADR program annexed to court for example. And we can introduce the conciliation and arbitration to disputes in intellectual property. Traditionally arbitration has been a crucial issue in intellectual property disputes. In that intellectual property rights are granted by the local sovereign power, many legal systems in the past maintained the position that the existence, extent, meaning and application of such rights could only be definitively decided by the granting authority or the courts of that country. There is wide recognition that the arbitration of intellectual property is desirable. The law in most of the major countries has been changed in recent years in favor of arbitrability of intellectual property rights. We can also propose ADR on-line.

  • PDF

Research on the Rational Solution for Oriental Medical Conflicts - Focusing on the relieving role of KCA in oriental medical disputes - (한방의료분쟁의 합리적인 해결방안 연구 - 한국소비자원의 한방의료 피해구제를 중심으로 -)

  • Jeong, Mi-Young
    • The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
    • /
    • v.9 no.2
    • /
    • pp.383-422
    • /
    • 2008
  • Considering above, It might be efficient that medical disputes would be settled by the intervention, the agreement, and the administrative relief that reflect mediators' opinion, who have rich social experience as well as specialized knowledge. Therefore, KCA needs to strengthen its function of mediation and improve relevant systems to become an effective settlement institution. And although Oriental medicine disputes have mainly given ex post facto explanations so far, administrative efforts such as policy development or legislation should be made for the high quality of Oriental medical services offered because an efficient way saving social or economic costs caused by the dispute would be precautionary measures. The traditional Oriental medicine is featured with the lack of baseline examination, the uncertainty of medical mistakes, the difficulty in clarifying and proving facts, the hardship of injury conformation and causality because of the characteristics of Oriental medicine, and the relative lightness of physical damages. Actually, there has been few legal settlements in Oriental medical disputes since the compensation, itself, compared to the lawsuit cost, is relatively much lower without practical benefits.

  • PDF

Brief Observation on Arbitration Agreement and Arbitral Award - Focusing on Construction Disputes - (중재합의와 중재판정에 관한 소고 -건설분쟁을 중심으로-)

  • Cho Dae-Yun
    • Journal of Arbitration Studies
    • /
    • v.14 no.1
    • /
    • pp.273-314
    • /
    • 2004
  • There is a belief in the construction industry that the traditional court system may not be an ideal forum to effectively and efficiently resolve construction disputes due to the protracted proceedings and the three tier appeal system resulting in a long delay in the final and conclusive settlement of the dispute, relatively high costs involved, the lack of requisite knowledge and experience in the relevant industry, etc. Hence, they assert that certain alternative dispute resolution ('ADR') methods, such as mediation, conciliation, arbitration or a new system for dispute settlement in the form of any combination thereof should be developed and employed for construction disputes so as to resolve them more promptly and efficiently to the satisfaction of all the disputants concerned. This paper discusses certain merits of such assertions and the need for additional considerations for effective resolution of the construction disputes in light of the complexity of the case, importance of expert witnesses, parties' relationship and non-level playing field of the construction industry and so on. At the same time, however, given the inherent nature of disputes rendering the parties involved in an adversarial position, it would rather be difficult, if not practically impossible, to satisfy all the parties concerned in the dispute. Accordingly, in this study, it is also purported to address the demerits of such assertions by studying the situation from a more balanced perspective, in particular, in relation to the operation of such ADRs. In fact, most of such ADRs as stipulated by special acts, such as the Construction Industry Basic Act of Korea, in the form of mediation or conciliation, have failed to get support from the industry, and as a result, such ADRs are seldom used in practice. Tn contrast, the court system has been greatly improved by implementing a new concentrated review system and establishing several tribunals designed to specialize in the review and resolution of specific types of disputes, including the construction disputes. These improvements of the court system have been warmly received by the industry. Arbitration is another forum for settlement of construction disputes, which has grown and is expected to grow as the most effective ADR with the support from the construction industry. In this regard, the Korean Commercial Arbitration Board ('KCAB') has established a set of internal rules end procedures in operation to efficiently handle construction disputes. Considering the foregoing, this paper addresses the most important elements of the arbitration, i.e., arbitration agreement and arbitral award, primarily focusing on the domestic arbitrations before the KCAB. However, since this parer is prepared for presentation at the construction disputes seminar for the public audience, it is not intended for academic purposes, nor does it delve into any specific acadcmic issues. Likewise, although this paper addresses certain controversial issues by way of introduction, it mainly purports to facilitate the understanding of the general public, including the prospective arbitrators on the KCAB roster without the relevant legal education and background, concerning the importance of the integrity of the arbitration agreement and the arbitral award. In sum, what is purported in this study is simply to note that there are still many outstanding issues with mediation, conciliation and arbitration, as a matter of system, institutional operation or otherwise, for further study and consideration so as to enhance them as effective means for settlement of construction disputes, in replacement of or in conjunction with the court proceeding. For this purpose, it is essential for all the relevant parties, including lawyers, engineers, owners, contractors and social activists aiming to protect consumers' and subcontractors' interests, to conduct joint efforts to study the complicated nature of construction works and to develop effective means for examination and handling of the disputes of a technical nature, including the accumulation of the relevant industrial data. Based on the foregoing, the parties may be in a better position to select the appropriate dispute resolution mechanism, a court proceeding or in its stead, an effective ADR, considering the relevant factors of the subject construction works or the contract structure, such as the bargaining position of the parties, their financial status, confidentiality requirements, technical or commercial complexity of the case at hand, urgency for settlements, etc.

  • PDF

Problems of South-North Arbitral Cooperation under Agreement on Settlement Procedure of Commercial Disputes between south and north Korea (남북분쟁 해결합의서 체결에 따른 중재협력의 과제)

  • 김상호
    • Journal of Arbitration Studies
    • /
    • v.11 no.1
    • /
    • pp.3-35
    • /
    • 2001
  • $\ulcorner$The South-North Joint Declaration$\lrcorner$ of June 15, 2000 made by President Kim Dae Jung and National Defense Committee Chairman Kim Jong Il will contribute to the activation of economic exchange between south and north Korea. To realize the fundamental spirit of the South-North Joint Declaration, the authorities concerned of south and north Korea have reached an agreement titled $\ulcorner$Agreement on Settlement Procedure of Commercial Disputes$\lrcorner$ last December. In this connection, a speedy and reasonable settlement of commercial disputes arising therefrom is becoming a problem of vital importance between south and north Korea. Also, south and north arbitral institutions have to consider a possible arbitration agreement carefully to solve the disputes systematically under the Agreement, which will serve as an example for similar arrangements and possible harmonization in East-West commercial relations. A variety of dispute settlements including friendly consultations, conciliation and arbitration will be used more frequently within the framework of the bilateral agreements of governmental or non-governmental level which have been concluded in the past between socialist and capitalistic economy countries. There is a growing tendency that East-West trade parties recognize and accept the UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules in their contracts. So it is advisable to use the UNCITRAL Rules in arbitrations of south and north Korea in case that the interested parties fail to agree on applicable rules. Finally it should be noted that pre-arbitral settlement called ‘joint conciliation’ should be reflected in the settlement mechanism of commercial disputes between south and north Korean parties as proved to be successful between the U.S. and China trade in the past.

  • PDF