• International Commerce and Information Review
• /
• v.8 no.1
• /
• pp.243-257
• /
• 2006

This study is to introduce the Chinese Contract Law against non-performance of the contract and to solve the wide range of problems involving to executing the trading contract. The parties' liability for the period of performance, the place of performance, the failure to deliver conforming goods together with it's nature of the lack of conformity, and the methods of compensation against damages and the force majeure clauses application. Those issues affect directly to commercial transactions in international business. The focus is more on the interrelationship of private individuals in its trade and on aiming to remove the legal obstacles from the Chinese Contract Law to freely flow of international trade. Reference may include foreign corrupt practices, Conventions on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods and Laws of England, France, and Japan. This study has brought the efforts of these issues in the full spectrum of performance and with concentrations on effectiveness to avoid the different viewpoints of the general principles of CISG and commercial practice founded pre-eminently. This study, in presenting the legal framework, will contribute to a better understanding of the purpose of rules of Chinese Contract -Law as they interact to the benefit of the parties involved in international trade transactions. The writer believes that a problem-oriented approach and the concentration as outlined above would offer a different perspective for law faculty teaching in this area and hope that this study can be sufficiently diverse to satisfy many of those views.

• Korea Trade Review
• /
• v.43 no.1
• /
• pp.25-45
• /
• 2018

International commercial arbitration is an inseparable part of today's international commerce. International transactions are becoming increasingly complex. Problems brought by multi-party and multi-contract arbitration pose problems for traditional arbitration systems. The Korean Commercial Arbitration Board(KCAB) has released updated International Arbitration Rules(2016 Rules) and has adopted innovations similar to those introduced in the rules of major international arbitration institutions in recent years. The changes in the 2016 Rules are intended to increase the efficiency of the arbitral process, and introduce the process for consolidation of claims. For international commerce contracts, it would be appropriate, and necessary, to adopt a multi-party arbitration clause, as consolidated arbitration provides effective resolutions for multi-party disputes.

• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.64
• /
• pp.65-97
• /
• 2014

Arbitration is the dispute methods for speedy and economic resolutions in international commercial areas. In maritime disputes cases in East Asia, Korea and Japan are the regional benefits to cover and deal with the maritime cases on arbitration. And Korea and Japan are the competitive maritime industry for heavy shipbuilding industry, cargo carrier, processing and transhipment service on ports, and ship financial services in national competitive areas. Japan is the Tokyo maritime arbitration commission(TOMAC) as an uniquely capable of dealing with arbitrations involving problems arising in the sea field. TOMAC provides amended its arbitration rules 2014 aiming at matching with the maritime disputes circumstances with three maritime arbitration rules as ordinary rules, simplified rules and the rules of small claims arbitration procedure. KCAB however, as the unique commercial arbitration board in Korea is dealing on all of the commercial disputes on only the international commercial arbitration rules in 2011. Though KCAB is dealt with maritime dispute cases on international arbitration rules in Korea, it is small and simple compared with TOMAC in Japan. Maritime disputes are highly complicated and embroiled with multi-parties contract and subcontracts arising under contracts relating to bills of lading, charter parties, sale and purchase of ships, shipbuilding, ship financing and so forth. This paper is to provides a discussion and comparison on recently arbitration rules focus on the maritime aspects on Korea and Japan. We need to consider to make an independent and special institute and maritime arbitration rules including the multiparty consolidation and med-arb provisions for handling the disputes and resolution of maritime conflict cases in Korea.

• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.45
• /
• pp.51-82
• /
• 2010

The "rules of private international law" or "conflict of law rules" work to determine the governing law, the law applicable to international contracts. These rules permit parties' autonomy to choose the law applicable to their contracts in cases of both litigations and arbitrations. In this regards, the present article examines parties' five options for the choice of the law governing their contracts, which the parties should consider when negotiating and drafting an international agreement. This means that parties in international contracting should check the contents of the law that they are to choose as the governing law before doing so. The first option is to submit the contract to its own law, which can be the safest and simplest solution generally. However this option is subject to the consent of the other party, and is not appropriate when the domestic law chosen contains mandatory rules strongly protecting the other party. Secondly, the option of choosing the other party's law is not preferable in general. Even though the other party is strong enough to succeed in insisting on applying its own law, the other party is advised to counter-offer a neutral solution by suggesting the application of a transnational set of rules and principles of international contract, such as Unidroit Principles. The third option to choose the law of a third country should be taken with the caution that it should be harmonized with either, in case of litigations, the international jurisdiction clause which makes the country chosen have the jurisdiction over the dispute arising under the contract, or, in case of arbitrations, the way of selection of the arbitrator who has good knowledge of the law chosen. The fourth option of submitting the contract to the lex mercatoria or the general principles of law including the Unidroit Principles can be a advisable solution when a dispute is designed to be submitted to experienced arbitrators. The final and fifth is to be silent on the choice of the governing law in contracting. This option can be usefully available by experienced negotiators who are well familiar with the conflict of laws rules and enables the parties to avoid the difficulties to agree on the governing law issue and leave it open until a dispute arises.

• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.26
• /
• pp.3-34
• /
• 2005

This thesis is in focus on keeping int'l businessman in mind application of CISG to perform smoothly in the their oversea's trade in accordance with taking effect on ratification of it from first, March, 2005. First of all, they have to keep in mind that it is possible to fall within the sphere of application of CISG of their contracts made between parties whose places of business are in different countries or although they have their places of business in different contracting states, if rules of private int'l law imply or express to the application of law of contracting state. Therefore in order to avoid confusion about whether apply or not, it is necessary to customize application of CISG as a proper law of their contracts. If so, they can avoid problem of requirements as to forms and any other requirement as to forms. Secondly they must attend the use of the legislative history of CISG and the use of the int'l case law and various scholarly thesises that studied on CISG such as information of Institute of Int'l Commercial Law under School of Law, PACE University. If so, problems which can give a rise in connection with interpretation of a basic and important terminology of CISG will be successfully conquest. In addition to above mentioned attentiveness, they must keeping in mind that various problems in connection with application of provisions of CISG can give their oversea's business a obstacle. buy the way of precaution against this case, they have to collect and analyze various materials about CISG.

• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.12
• /
• pp.39-64
• /
• 1999

Under the CISG, there is a unequitable factor in comparing buyer's remedy with seller's remedy. In my opinion, CISG is more unequitable remedy clause than UCC or UNIDROIT principle of International Commercial Contract(1994) between seller and buyer. First, buyer who accepted defect goods must give seller notice the facts that seller delivered defect goods in two years after accepting defect goods. The cap of two year is unreasonable in a position of aggrieved buyer. This is being provided as 'within reasonable time' in UCC and there is no such provision in UNIDROIT Principle. Second, Buyer can avoid contract when seller breached fundamentally contract or seller didn't set a additional performance period about breaching of contract. Accordingly if buyer would not set a additional performance period, although seller's breachment of contract, he could not avoid the contract. Therefore, From a viewpoint of aggrieved buyer avoidable right of contract is restrainted. Third, to compare seller's remedy with buyer's, seller have more opportunity to cure breachment of contract than buyer. Under the CISG buyer is relatively placed at disadvantage in remedy of aggrieved party. In connection with remedy of aggrieved party, 'UNIDROIT principle of international commercial contracts' instead seller and buyer of aggrieved party, so there is not unequitable factor in remedy of aggrieved parties.

• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.51
• /
• pp.159-185
• /
• 2011

This paper is intended to discuss the controversial issue of the principles of change circumstances under the legal system of international commercial transactions. The principles of change circumstances, so called clausula rebus sic stantibus is the legal doctrine allowing for treaties to become inapplicable because of a fundamental change of circumstances. It is essentially an "escape clause" that makes an exception to the general rule of pacta sunt servanda (promises must be kept). The practical needs of international transactions differ from the established concepts of national contracts law. The purpose of this paper is to analyze the legal system and theories under the regimes of international commercial transactions such as the CISG, the PICC, and the PECL. Clausula rebus sic stantibus does not apply if the parties to a treaty had contemplated for the occurrence of the changed circumstance. It only relates to the changed circumstances that were never contemplated by the parties. This paper has shown that the hardship provisions in the CISG, PICC, PECL has similarities to each a validity defense and an excuse defense. it was provisions that CISG governs this issue in Article 79, PICC Article 6.2.1, 6.2.2, 6.2.3(in addition to Article 7.1.7), PECL Article 6.111(in addition to 8.108). It is time when we should reconsider its legal system with great interest in order to harmonize with the international standpoint. It will be the turning point of our viepoint under the international commercial transactions.

• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.12
• /
• pp.65-84
• /
• 1999

During the past few decades, we have witnessed three approaches to overcome the legal disparities between trading countries: - determining the individual governing law in accordance with the conflict of laws principle; - unifying and harmonizing private international law into uniform rules and substantive laws under the auspices of ICC, UNCITRAL, UNIDROIT and various NGOs ; and - drafting model laws like the UNCITRAL Model Law on Electronic Commerce and promoting member countries to enact them. Against this backdrop, the United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods (CISG) and the process by which it was adopted, established the benchmark for the unification of commercial law. The CISG, completed in 1980, merged civil and common law concepts and came into force in 1988 after a certain number of countries endorsed the treaty. Besides the CISG, the U.N. Limitations Convention and the UNIDROIT Principles of International Commercial Law, to name a few, have attempted to set cross-border legal norms and standards in the international business transactions. However, since the advent of computer-based commerce, there have emerged all-out efforts to establish uniform rules before national legal systems have been developed. As a consequence, the Model Law on Electronic Commerce has become a specimen legislation covering functional equivalents of paper-based writing and signature. For the credit enhancement exemplified by the Uniform Rules for Demand Guarantees (ICC Publication No.458), the UNCITRAL prepared the U.N. Convention on Independent Guarantees and Stand-by Letters of Credit, which was adopted by the U.N. General Assembly in 1995 but remains still not effective as only two countries have ratified this treaty so far. In this connection, two draft conventions underway at UNIDROIT and UNCITRAL deserve our attention as the probability of unification in the Korean Peninsula is mounting. They are to create security interests for commercial finance in moveable equipment and accounts receivable. The UCC-type security rights are regarded to be useful to enable the North Koreans with limited properties to borrow from the banks.

• Korea Trade Review
• /
• v.41 no.5
• /
• pp.15-39
• /
• 2016

Over the past couple of decades, we can see the emergence of a new lex mercatoria. It consists of international conventions or treaty, model laws and international principles. And such new lex mercatoria is driven by the international institutions such as UNCITRAL, UNIDROIT and ICC. The international convention and international principles in the field of international commercial transaction are considered : UN Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods(CISG) and The UNIDROIT Principles(PICC Principles). The former is the statue law for the latter, and the latter sometimes supports the former as an interpretation and supplementation of CISG. So, the purpose of this article is to evaluate and investigate the current status of CISG and PICC Principles in terms of application and interpretation principles. The results are as follows. First, PICC are used for the interpretation and supplementation of international law such as CISG, but CISG is a law, not a rule. Second, CISG and PICC Principles are not often chosen when parties chose the law governing their contract. The parties very often chose a national law ; the number of the parties choosing CISG and PICC Principles as a governing law was very low.

• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.13
• /
• pp.3-26
• /
• 2000

The International Chamber of Commerce published the millennium edition of its standard trade definitions, Incoterms 2000. Incoterms are a basic reference for sales contracts, in constant daily use throughout the world. The new version will make it easier for traders to do business in the new century, despite the growing volume and complexity of international transactions. Since Incoterms were first published in 1936, they have been updated six times. They precisely define the responsibilities of buyer and seller and are recognized as the international standard by customs authorities and courts in all the main trading nations. It is important for traders to incorporate the correct Incoterms into their international contracts to avoid unnecessary legal problems. Courts may otherwise interpret trade terms according to often widely divergent national laws and unless the use of Incoterms is specified, expensive legal disputes can arise. Division of costs is a most important element in every contract of sale. The parties must know not only who does what but also how costs resulting therefrom should be divided between them. In most cases the fact that a party must do something means that he must also bear the resulting costs, unless otherwise agreed. But there are many exceptions to this principle and uncertainties arise, particularly with respect to services performed by other parties. Also, difficulties arise with respect to the division of costs whenever additional costs are caused by unexpected events, such as hindrances causing a ship to deviate or to remain in a seaport longer than expected. The main principle of the division of costs is clear enough: the seller has to pay costs necessary for the goods to reach the agreed point of delivery, and the buyer has to pay any further costs after that point. But as noted, it is not always easy to implement this principle in practice, since the detailed distribution of functions under the various trade terms is not and cannot be fully defined in Incoterms. Instead, failing precise stipulations in the contract of sale, guidance must be sought from other criteria such as commercial practices used earlier by the same parties or the custom of trade.