• 무역학회지
• /
• 제45권1호
• /
• pp.203-219
• /
• 2020

The parties shall perform all actions necessary for the proper and expeditious conduct of arbitral proceedings. This includes complying without delay with any determination of the tribunal as to any and all procedural or evidential matters, or with any order or directions of the tribunal, and where appropriate, taking without delay any necessary steps to obtain a decision of the court on a preliminary question of jurisdiction or law. The parties are free to agree on the powers of the tribunal in case of a party's failure to do something necessary for the proper and expeditious conduct of the arbitration. The parties' general duty may be based on agreements, such as the duty not to ask the court for a dispute, the duty to carry out arbitral awards, and the duty of confidentiality. In this study, as a premise, after confirming the discussion related to Article 40 (general obligations of the parties) of the law, the arbitral tribunal will analyze the authority to execute it based on Article 41. As a matter of fact, in LMAA Terms 2017, the parties want to analyze what is required in order to proceed effectively.

• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제51권
• /
• pp.79-99
• /
• 2011

This study describes the seller's duty to deliver the goods in conformity with the contract. The purpose of this study is twofold: to analyze the seller's principal duty, comparing the United Nations Convention on the International Sale of Goods(CISG) with Sale of Goods Act(SGA) and to provide legal and practical advice to contracting parties who consider CISG or SGA as a governing law. This paper first considers the requirements for the conformity with the contract, which means contractual requirements agreed between parties and implied requirements not agreed between parties. Following this, the exclusion of the seller's duty to deliver the goods required by the contract is described. Finally, this paper ends up giving contracting parties legal and practical advice.

• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제37권
• /
• 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.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제22권1호
• /
• pp.23-41
• /
• 2012

Arbitration provides quicker resolution and may also limit the erosion of business relationships that is often the result of prolonged litigation. The process of arbitration typically involves four phases: 1) selection of arbitrator(s) and opening statement of positions by the parties; 2) rebuttal of opposing positions; 3) interviews, hearings, and information gathering; and 4) rendering of a decision and issuance of the arbitrator's award. A distinctive feature of arbitration is the party's ability to select the arbitrator and the process and rules that will be followed at the hearing. Once that process has been completed, the parties are in the hands of the arbitrator or tribunal. The arbitrator's duty goes on the arbitration procedure efficiently and renders arbitration award. This article discussed various ways the arbitrator leads to a shorter, less risky arbitration, which benefits the parties. We recommend the arbitrator the following comments; Before the hearing the arbitrator decides to whether an arbitration agreement is valid, and a scope of authorities of him in advance. In the hearing, the arbitrator gives both parties a sufficient opportunity to produce evidence, witnesses, and make their arguments. Lastly, the arbitrator need to be cautious in guiding the parties toward an amicable settlement.

• 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.

• 한국항공운항학회:학술대회논문집
• /
• 한국항공운항학회 2016년도 춘계학술대회
• /
• pp.89-94
• /
• 2016

This paper is to investigate how each cases(recurrent cases) is to be classified and what each parties should prepare to solve their cases by civil law system and so on. We could find the increased volume (or quantity) of transportation by air recently and have to worry about the sky-rocketed cases of unfulfilled navigation management(aviation service) proportionately inevitably. So we knew that some cases of disputes are solved by unreasonable demand, unilateral concession or irrational decision without any logical or legal criterion, because both sides(passenger and carrier) do not recognize the situation correctly and have any preparation for the legal settlement. Therefore we should prepare the classification work and comprehend about the legal effect(fulfillment retardation of duty, fulfillment impossibility of duty and imperfect fulfillment in our civil law system) of each cases. We can grasp the legal relationship with a carrier and a passengers by the legal analysis more efficiently and save (or help) energy and time of concerned parties.

• 통상정보연구
• /
• 제16권4호
• /
• pp.125-150
• /
• 2014

국제해상운송에서 위험화물의 운송량은 꾸준하게 증가하고 있다. 이에 따라 각 국제협정들도 위험화물에 대한 규정을 신설하거나 개정하고 있는 추세이다. 특히 연료와 같은 위험화물의 운송은 필연적으로 발생할 수밖에 없기 때문에, 위험화물에 대한 정의와 범위에 대한 중요성이 부각되고 있다. 또한 위험화물에 대한 당사자 간의 책임이 위험화물에 대한 통지와 운송인의 인지여부에 따라 상이하게 나타나고 있으며, 이와 관련된 판결들이 사건별로 다양한 형태로 나타나고 있다. 특히 운송규칙의 책임조항에서 위험화물에 대한 운송인의 인지여부에 따라 송화인의 책임과 면책 범위가 상반된 형태로 나타난 것을 살펴볼 수 있었다. 본 논문에서는 먼저 선행연구를 통하여 위험화물의 정의와 범위를 분석하였다. 두 번째로 운송인의 위험화물 인지여부에 관한 판결들에 대한 분석을 통하여 통일성 있는 조항 해석의 필요성을 살펴보았다. 위험화물은 특별한 특징을 가진 화물로서 당사자 간의 책임과 면책에 대해서 일반조항과 달리 해석되어질 필요가 있다. 일반화물일 경우 단순히 과실여부에 따라 책임을 물을 수 있고, 당사자 간의 의무의 범위가 구체적으로 정해질 수 있다. 하지만 위험화물일 경우에는 당사자 간의 구체적인 조항이 명시되지 않는다면, 위험에 따른 의무를 부담해야 할 당사자가 상황에 따라 누구의 책임인지 혼란을 야기할 수 있다. 따라서 위험화물의 인지여부에 관한 판례들을 분석함으로서 위험화물조항의 적용을 위한 통일적인 기준의 필요성과 해결방안을 제시하였다.

• 무역학회지
• /
• 제44권3호
• /
• pp.137-154
• /
• 2019

This study analyzes the major provisions of the UK Insurance Act 2015 and Marine Insurance Act 1906 on the duty of disclosure under the doctrine of utmost good faith. Marine insurance contracts are based on "utmost good faith" and one aspect of this is that MIA 1906 imposes a duty on prospective policy holders to disclose all material facts. In the Insurance Act 2015 of the United Kingdom, the contents of the precedent were enacted such that we have borrowed the legal principles of common law until now. The insurer is required to more actively communicate with the insurer rather than passively underwriting and asking questions of the insured. The Act details the insured's constructive knowledge of the material circumstance by reviewing the current case law and introduces a new system for the insurer's proportionate remedy against the insured's breach of the duty of fair presentation of risk. This is a default regime, which may be altered by agreement between the parties.

• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제65권
• /
• pp.21-49
• /
• 2015

This study primarily concerns the various franchisor's duties provided under the Draft Common Frame of Reference (here-in-after DCFR) in comparison with those under Korean law. It particularly focuses on the followings. First, it scrutinizes the rules on the scope of application in a comparative way, focusing on the following questions; what is the definition of a franchise contract and what are the essential elements of such contract. Second, it investigates in a comparative way the provisons as to the franchisor's contractual duties as follows; 1) a duty to collaborate actively and loyally and coordinate their respective efforts, 2) a duty to provide the franchisee with adequate and timely information before the contract is concluded, 3) a duty to grant the franchisee a right to use the intellectual property rights, 4) a duty to provide the franchisee with the know-how, 5) a duty to render the franchisee with assistance, 6) a duty to ensure the products ordered by the franchisee are supplied, 7) a duty to provide information during the performance, 8) a duty to warn the franchisee decreased supply capacity, 9) a duty to make reasonable efforts to promote and maintain the reputation of the franchise network. Its emphasis is particularly put on the rationals, the contents and the nature of such duties. Third, this study provides legal and practical advice to the contracting parties when they intend to insert either the DCFR or Korean law in their contract as a governing law.

• 통상정보연구
• /
• 제11권1호
• /
• pp.27-43
• /
• 2009

This article explored the customers protection regulations in electronic payment system by Article 4A of the UCC and EFTA of 1978 and by Electronic Financial Transaction Act of Korea. Both Korea and America have various regulations to protect concerned parties(customers). For examples, the errors of payment order, money-back guarantee, and unauthorized payment order etc. First, this Article focuses on the allocation of risk of loss caused by ambiguous term in payment orders that do not express the subjective intention of the senders. Second, most rights and obligations created by Article 4A of America can be varied with the agreement of affected parties. But there are some exceptions. The exceptions include the money-back guarantee. So Receiving bank have to pay to originator the ordered money included interest. However, Korea also has money-back guarantee but bank do not pay interest to sender. Lastly, Electronic Funds Transfer Act of 1978 and Regulation E has US$ 50 regulation in order to protect customers on the unauthorized payment order. Article 4A imposes duty to detect unauthorized payment orders to originator in relation to the establishment of commercially reasonable security procedure, while Korean law imposes the duty to notify the bank in order to decrease the loss resulted from unauthorized payment order.