• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.17 no.2
• /
• pp.71-100
• /
• 2007

To promote the way of resolving the increasing disputes regarding international intellectual property by arbitration, we should overcome uncertainty thwarting the dispute resolution; i.e., whether a dispute regarding intellectual property would be an arbitrable subject, whether the arbitration agreement would be valid and enforceable, and whether the arbitral award could be recognized and enforced in a foreign country. This article is intended to seek how to promote and facilitate the resolution of international disputes regarding intellectual property by arbitration. This article in Chapter II will examine the characteristics of the IP disputes first. Chapter III of this article will study arbitrability of IP disputes. Then, Chapter IV will discuss the requirements, validity, and effectiveness of arbitration agreement of international IP disputes. The author will discuss the procedure of arbitration of the international IP disputes in Chapter V, and finally the recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitral awards thereon in Chapter VI. Due to the so called 'territoriality principle' in intellectual property, the international disputes thereof confront numerous procedural setback, e.g., jurisdiction, conflict of laws, the recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments or awards. To overcome such setbacks, I propose resolution of international IP disputes by one-step arbitration procedure through widely recognizing the arbitrability of IP disputes, and utilizing unnational nature of arbitration. In addition, I propose to set up the principles as to arbitration of the international IP disputes as the American Law Institute has formulated the principles for International Intellectual Property Litigations. By setting up these principles, I am certain it will be helpful to just and prompt resolution of international IP disputes which occur more frequently these days.

• International Journal of Contents
• /
• v.8 no.2
• /
• pp.75-81
• /
• 2012

This study explores the important causal relationship between the public (domestic) and trade (international) disputes of South Korea and China. To understand the relations between the domestic and international disputes, Putnam's study of the two-level game theory has been conducted in order to analyze the effect of complicated social and political frameworks on international trade disputes. Due to the social and political differences between South Korea and China, this study provides three findings based on negotiation, policy, and strategic approaches.

• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.28 no.2
• /
• pp.249-275
• /
• 2018

Today's Internet environment is growing rapidly, and transactions based on it are also rapidly increasing. E-commerce allows merchants and consumers in different countries to easily trade goods across borders. However, the increase in international consumer transactions through the Internet is accompanied by an increase in disputes. International consumer transactions are characterized by a distinction among long distance, small sum, and different jurisdictions. International consumer transactions cannot be solved only by way of resolving disputes in past international transactions. The best way to resolve disputes between international carriers and consumers is through the Internet. In this regard, UNCITRAL has been preparing to enact legislation on ODR as a solution to international electronic trade disputes and, as a result, UNCITRAL adopted guidelines for operating the ODR procedure for building the ODR platform. The European Union has also increased its disputes in the European Union, which is active in the intra-regional market. Institutional improvements were made to solve this problem; therefore, the European Union (EU) has enacted the ODR Regulations for EU consumer disputes. Based on such, this study constructed the ODR platform, which is used as a way to resolve consumer disputes in the regional market.

• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.57
• /
• pp.61-78
• /
• 2013

The purpose of this study is to clarify the standard of fair and equitable treatment. Although most international investment treaties prescribe fair and equitable treatment that is the obligation to provide fair and equitable treatment to foreign investor, there is no clear definition and specific elements of fair and equitable treatment. Through the arbitral award cases we can find that tribunals have interpreted to include six principles; Due process & Protection from denial of justice, Good faith, Reasonableness & Nondiscrimination, Compliance with contractual obligation, Full protection and security, Transparency & Protection of the investor's legitimate expectations. This study suggest that host countries and investors focus on international trends concerning investment disputes in order to avoid future disputes. So future disputes can be prevented and prepared in advance.

• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.26 no.3
• /
• pp.51-66
• /
• 2016

This paper considers how various types of patent disputes can be more efficiently resolved through arbitration, rather than litigation. For this analysis, it takes three types of patent disputes as a control sample - contractual disputes, infringement disputes and FRAND disputes - and assess how these disputes can be better resolved through arbitration in terms of several criteria, namely, the suitability of the decision-makers, the number of forums in which disputes have to separately decided and enforced, procedural flexibility and confidentiality. The paper takes into consideration that certain types of patent disputes, such as infringement disputes and FRAND disputes are unlikely to be subject to pre-existing arbitration agreements. In these types of disputes, parties may make the decision between arbitration and litigation based on strategic and tactical concerns, rather than legal ones. The paper concludes that, given this limitation, it is not possible to categorically state whether arbitration is more suitable than litigation for resolving patent disputes. The most sensible course to follow in adopting arbitration for patent disputes is for legal advisors to be familiar with the intricate benefits and pitfalls of arbitration in patent disputes, and to actively consider referring a dispute to arbitration over litigation after a dispute has arisen.

• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.27 no.4
• /
• pp.61-72
• /
• 2017

In this study, the Commission proposed the mitigation of remedies by improving the role of medical disputes and preventing medical disputes. Medical disputes include a comprehensive description of medical malpractice, medical negligence, medical malpractice, and medical malpractice. Medical negligence refers to the neglect of medical care due to careless medical care in the treatment of patients, leading to patient injury and death. An inappropriate response in the process of international treatment could result in international trials and a decline in international credibility. In cases where medical disputes arise, health care is strictly necessary to determine the truth or absence of medical malpractice, and these expertise and experience are usually provided by emotion. With the neutral and objective emotions provided fairly and impartially, medical care expertise and experience can be fair, and the medical disputes can be resolved peacefully if the parties are trustworthy. The Health Care Dispute Mediation Committee should focus on enhancing the professionalism, objectivity, and reliability of medical care.

• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.32 no.1
• /
• pp.3-24
• /
• 2022

Today's society appears to be entering a hyper-connected society due to mental notions and information communication technologies being converged for advanced development. Trade between countries around the world is increasing amidst the digital economy and fourth industrial revolution, which is being accompanied by a growing number of trade disputes. Appropriately resolving disputes is crucial for corporate growth, and ADR is drawing attention as a more reasonable solution between interested parties compared to lawsuits. This also applies to international trade as there is growing movements to resolve disputes between parties more efficiently and feasibly through mediation. The adaptation of an international convention for implementation in a third country for settlement agreements drawn up through such international mediation is a new and unprecedented attempt. In other words, the Singapore Convention on Mediation looks to resolve international commercial disputes by granting executive force on the outcomes of mediations. However, a system to solve various legal issues must be put into place to execute the outcomes in the respective country or third country, and a variety of tools for this are necessary.

• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.43
• /
• pp.481-507
• /
• 2009

Along with continuous increase in international investments encouraged by wide spread bilateral investment treaties (BIT) including free trade agreements (FTA), international investment disputes have been also increasing. This means that a host State, an importer of foreign investments, and a investor who exports its investment to foreign State, need to take measures to prevent international disputes arising from international investment or to prepare for the arbitration for resolving the disputes. Under these circumstances, this paper compares ICSID arbitration rules and UNCITRAL arbitration rules in respect of (i) the institution of arbitration, (ii) the appointment of arbitrators and the composition of arbitral tribunal, and (iii) the procedures for, and the form of, arbitral awards. On base of this comparison, this paper further suggests certain practical issues that the host State's government and the foreign investors should be aware of in order to be ready for the resolutions of disputes by ICSID or UNCITRAL arbitrations.

• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.8 no.1
• /
• pp.353-375
• /
• 1998

This study is focused on the rules for resolving documentary credits disputes. First, International Chamber of Commerce published Documentary Credit Dispute Expertise Rules on October 1, 1997. The DOCDEX Rules are the International Chamber of Commerce(ICC) response to a clear call from the international banking community for a rapid, cost effective, expert-based dispute resolution mechanism for documentary credit practice, including bank-to-bank reimbursement issues. Next, The International Center for Letter of Credit Arbitration was established in September 1996. The Center was founded as a result of an initiative from within the letter of credit community and has been co-sponsored by the United States Council on International Banking(USCIB) and the Institute of International Banking Law and Practice Inc. In September, ICLOCA adopted its "Rules of Arbitration for Letter of Credit Disputes." Therefore, parties to letter of credit disputes should choose a appropriate dispute resolution mechanism under the circumstances in the future.

• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.20
• /
• pp.343-365
• /
• 2003

Dispute plays a key role in maintaining the desirable performance of trade transaction. In an effort to stay competitive in a global marketplace, the Korean companies need to become more aware of alternatives to costly and time-consuming litigation. Korean companies, therefore, should be more concerned with ADR(Alternative Dispute Resolution) system and should utilize ADR to settle their disputes effectively and efficiently. ADR encompasses all process of dispute resolution as a substitute for the traditional litigation. Generally, three kinds of ADR are available in Korea: Negotiation, mediation, and arbitration. This article investigates reasons why ADR isn't used well in Korea and suggests ways how ADR can work best in international trade disputes. To expand ADR system in international trade disputes, it is very important for both the company and the scholar to recognize the concept and usefulness of ADR system. The Korean Commercial Arbitration Board also must help both Korean companies and scholars recognize the mechanism of dispute resolution and utilize ADR system in international trade disputes.