• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제69권
• /
• pp.85-105
• /
• 2016

The fact that one of the parties to the sale contract has had to pay demurrage to the shipowner under LD clauses in the charterparty does not of itself mean that he can recover that loss from his sale counter party under the sale contract: the route to such recovery is through express clauses in the sale contract itself. LD clauses in a sale contract stand free and independent of their counterparts in the relevant charterparty. LD clauses in a sale contract should be construed and applied as clauses in sale contracts, not as adjuncts to charterparties. Their interpretation should therefore be coloured not by decisions on laytime and demurrage in charterparties, but by their relationship to the contractual duties of CIF and FOB sellers and buyers. The results discussed here have implications for the drafting of LD clauses in sale contracts. If unwelcome surprises are to be avoided, it seems to advisable to start from the principle: what exactly do traders want or need in LD clauses. They need a clause which covers them against charterparty losses where those losses are the result of dealy caused by the counterparty to the sale contract. The parties to the sale contracts are well advised to prepare LD clauses concentrating on that purpose and bearing in mind the followiing questions. First, should the loading and discharge code in the sale contract appear in traders' or trade associations' standard terms and conditions or should they be left to ad hoc negotiation in contract sheets? Second, should that code be as complete as possible, covering loading or discharge periods or rates, demurrage and despatch, or is it enough for only some of those matters to be covered explicitly, leaving other matters to be governed" as per charterparty"? Third, does the introduction or incorporation of a stipulation for the giving of a notice of readiness make the start of laytime more or less predictable as between seller and buyer? Finally should a loading and discharge code in a sale contract actully be called a "laytime and demmurrage clauses"?

• 벤처창업연구
• /
• 제11권4호
• /
• pp.205-213
• /
• 2016

본 연구는 중소기업우선제도의 용어 및 해석이 불명확하여 국가연구개발사업 성과활용이 저해되고 있다는 비판에 따라 관련 용어의 정의 및 해석을 명확하게 하고자 하였다. 첫째, "국내"라 함은 우리나라에서 사업소의 주소나 거소를 두는 것"을 말한다. 둘째, "기술실시능력"이라 함은 "국가연구개발 성과기술을 이용하여 제품의 개발이나 생산 또는 판매활동을 수행하거나, 이에 관한 공정기술의 향상 등 '기술을 사업화 또는 실용화할 수 있는 사실상의 역량"을 말한다. 셋째, "우선적으로 고려"에 있어 "우선"이라 함은 기술실시계약을 체결하고자 하는 기업이 여러 곳일 경우에, 먼저 중소기업에게 계약체결의 기회를 제공하여야 한다는 원칙을 규정한 것으로 특별한 사정이 존재하지 않는 한, 중소기업과 기술실시계약을 하도록 기술보유기관에 대해 일정한 노력의무를 부과한 것이다. "우선적으로 고려"하여야 한다는 반드시 중소기업에게 우선권을 제공하여야 하는 것과는 달리 중소기업과의 기술계약체결을 위한 '노력'을 충분히 한 것으로서 본 규정의 의무조건을 이행한 것으로 간주될 수 있다. 본 연구의 의의는 현행 중소기업 우선제도의 용어 정의 및 해석을 통해 현행 제도의 실무 적용가능성을 높인 점을 들 수 있으며, 본 연구의 한계로는 "기술실시능력 보유 여부에 대한 판단기준", 중소기업 발굴을 위한 '충분한 노력'에 대해 절차와 방법에 대해 일의적으로 명확하게 정의 및 해석하지 못한 바, 이에 대한 후속연구를 기대한다.

• 무역학회지
• /
• 제44권6호
• /
• pp.1-21
• /
• 2019

In the case of a sea transport contract, the decision of the governing law, together with the choice of lex fori, shall be a legal issue in all legal disputes involving damage to the goods. In sea transport contracts, a paramount clause is often established in conjunction with the governing law clause, which can lead to conflict between these two clauses. Most B/L's back clauses contain a paramount clause that provides that the Hague Rules, Hague-Visby Rules, or foreign laws that prevail over other provisions of the terms. The Hague Rules and the Hague-Visby Rules, however, set different standards regarding the extent of the sea carrier's liability. Therefore, in the interpretation of ground conditions, it is an important question whether the Hague Rules or the Hague-Visby Rules are applied or whether each rule is applied as a law. For example, the paramount clause in the Superior Pescadores case was problematic in the interpretation of the term 'Hague Rules.' In this case, the English Court held that the expression 'Hague Rules' could be used to mean the Hague-Visby Rules, and not exclusively the Hague Rules. Therefore, the Hague-Visby Rules were applied in the judgment of this case, which suggests that this case can be a valuable precedent in future legal matters.

• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제69권
• /
• pp.127-151
• /
• 2016

UNIDROIT Principles of International Commercial Contracts(PICC) was published in 1994. PICC has been functioned as a guideline of international commercial contracts, an applicable law to govern a contract by the agreement of the parties to a contract, general principles of law and lex mercatoria. In addition, PICC has a role of interpreting or supplementing international uniform law instruments as well as domestic laws, and also has served as a model for national and international legislations. PICC has been accepted as a authoritative source of knowledge of international trade usages of international commercial contracts to the arbitral tribunal rather than domestic court because it excluded the characteristics of hard law at the drafting stage. This article dealt with the rule on gross disparity of validity which fall outside the scope of UN Convention on Contract for the International Sale of Goods(CISG), which has obtained a leading legal position of uniform law in international sales of good. In other words, PICC suggests a series of meaningful solutions to the issue of gross disparity of contract which is the most complicated among legal disputes occurring during the process of conclusion of contact and also extremely different and diverse between legal systems. This article covered the issue of gross disparity of contract at the conclusion of contact and suggested the legal basis of several rules related to the gross disparity by analysing gross disparity rule of PICC. Furthermore, this article suggested legal check points or implication as well as interpretation and evaluation on doctrine of laesio enormis and undue influence or unconscionability. This article also dealt with a comparative analysis with Principles of European Contract Law(PECL) and Common European Sales Law(CESL) which have important legal positions in the area of international commercial contract as well as in terms of close relationship to PICC by linking with recent court or arbitral tribunal rulings.

• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제62권
• /
• pp.113-132
• /
• 2014

Judicial decisions make it clear that in all CIF, CFR and FOB contracts, incorporation of charter party into sale contracts is the only effective way for recovery of demurrage in the context of sale contracts. The case law would appear to clarify a number of important issues: The words of incorporation in the sale contract play a vital role in determining the extent of the influence of the charter party principles over the sale contract. Hence, unless it is expressly provided otherwise, the courts tend to apply the charter party principles to the incorporated charter party provisions to the extent that they make sense in the context of sale contract, and that they do not undermine the underlying foundations of international trade law. In this respect the courts also take into account the factual background of the case with a view to objectively ascertaining the intention of the parties. The law is, however, less clear on the effects of the incorporated charter party provisions in sale contracts. There is still no straightforward answer to the question of to what extent the charter party law is applied to the incorporated charter party provisions in the context of sale contracts. The case law on this matter merely provides piecemeal solutions, and it is not possible to extract a general rule which will help interpretation of those charter party provisions which have not yet been subject to litigation or arbitration. Therefore, it should be noted that the parties would prepare Incorporation Clause in their sale contracts in reliance of the rules to achieve the desired results.

• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제62권
• /
• pp.135-178
• /
• 2014

The Uniform Commercial Code (UCC) sets the standards of good faith in a commercial transaction for the sale of goods. With every sales contract, there is an implied obligation for both the seller and the buyer to negotiate the contract and perform under the terms of the contract in good faith. The agreement between both parties and the customs in the industry determine how the good faith standard should be applied to a particular transaction. Generally, the meaning of good faith, though always based on honesty, may vary depending on the specific context in which it is used. A person is said to buy in good faith when he or she holds an honest belief in his or her right or title to the property and has no knowledge or reason to know of any defect in the title. In section 1-201 of the UCC good faith is defined generally as "honesty in fact in the conduct or transaction concerned." Article 2 of the UCC says "good faith in the case of a merchant means honesty in fact and the observance of reasonable commercial standards of fair dealing in the trade." The sales contract will generally determine which party is required to perform first. This provision helps to determine if the buyer or the seller is in breach of the agreement due to failing to perform as stated by the contract. Either the seller must deliver the items before the buyer is required to accept and pay or the buyer must pay for the items before the seller has the duty to act in good faith and deliver the items in a reasonable manner. If the contract does not specifically define who is required to perform, industry customs and fair trade may determine what is acceptable for the transaction. Under the UCC, the buyer is required to pay for the goods when they are delivered, unless the contract states otherwise. Therefore, the UCC imposes an obligation of good faith on the performance of every contract or duty under its purview. The law also generally requires good faith of fiduciaries and agents acting on behalf of their principals. This article discusses problems of the principles of good faith under the UCC. Specifically, this paper focuses on the interpretation of UCC sections and analysis of various cases. By comparing, also, UCC and Korean law, the paper proposes some implications of good faith issues for Korean law.

• Journal of Korea Trade
• /
• 제24권6호
• /
• pp.19-36
• /
• 2020

Purpose - This paper analyzes how to interpret the legal view of the precedents to the UK Insurance Act 2015, comparing it to the UK Marine Insurance Act (MIA) 1906 with a focus on the relationship between the duty of uberrimae fidei and the duty of disclosure. Furthermore, this study focuses on the judgment of the Korean Supreme Court in a case, that examined whether the legal nature of the duty of disclosure or duty of uberrimae fidei in insurance law can be considered as a matter related to the insurer's liability when the applicable terms of English law are incorporated under the insurance contract. Design/methodology - This paper belongs to the field of explanatory legal study, which aims to explain and test whether the choice of law is linked to the conditions that occur in the reality of judicial practice. The approach that is used toward this problem is the legal analytical normative approach. The juridical approach involves studying and examining theories, concepts, legal doctrines and legislation that are related to the problem. Findings - Regarding the requirements and effects of breach of the duty of disclosure, if English law and the Korean Commercial Act are handled differently from each other and Korean law is recognized as the applicable law outside of the insurer's liability, it may be whether the insurer's immunity under English law is contrary to s.633 of the Korean Commercial Act. In considering the breach of the duty of disclosure as a matter of the insurer's liability, even if English law is applied as a governing law, the question of how to interpret the agreement of the governing law in this case may also be raised in the interpretation of Korean International Private Law in relation to the applicable law that applies to the rest of the matter, excluding the matters of liability. Originality/value - According to the Korean Supreme Court judgement under the governing law of the MIA 1906, the basis for recognizing the assured's pre-and post-contractual duty of disclosure is separate, and the only important matters to be notified by the assured after the conclusion of the insurance contract are those that are "relevant" and "material circumstances" that are "relevant" to the matter in question after the conclusion of the insurance contract.

• 한국콘텐츠학회논문지
• /
• 제21권3호
• /
• pp.626-633
• /
• 2021

주택도시보증공사는 주택분양보증 사고발생시 환급이행을 신청할 경우 분양계약자에게 특별한 사정이 없는 한 입주금을 환급하여 보증 책임을 부담한다. 주택도시보증공사는 환급이행을 약관규제법에 근거하여 거절할 수 있으나 이와 관련하여 이해 당사자 간에 분쟁이 지속적으로 발생되고 있다. 이에 환급이행에 따른 법적쟁점에 대한 문제점과 개선방안을 연구하는 것을 목적으로 한다. 첫째, 약관규제법상 보증효력 및 보증범위의 문제 둘째, 주택도시보증공사의 조건부 제3자를 위한 보증계약의 문제 셋째, 대법원의 기존 판례의 태도의 문제점을 대상으로 검토하였다. 이런 법적 쟁점들을 검토한 결과 환급이행에 따른 약관해석은 신의 성실의 원칙에 따라 해석되어지고 있으나 개별 사안에 따라 판례들이 긍정과 부정 판결로 갈라질 수 있음을 확인하였다. 또한 주택분양보증은 조건부 제3자를 위한 보증계약임에도 불구하고, 이해 당사자와 같은 적극적 다툼으로 수분양자가 선의의 피해를 보는 것을 확인하였다. 이에 주택도시보증공사가 고객의 주거안정을 위한 설립취지에 맞도록 역할과 협력사항의 개선방안을 제안하였다.

• 만화애니메이션 연구
• /
• 통권29호
• /
• pp.243-266
• /
• 2012

공모전이 활성화되어 다양한 단체에서 다양한 목적을 가지고 공모전을 주최하고 있다. 공공기관부터 개인 사업자까지 다양한 주최의 공모전 요강을 분석해보면 저작권을 주최 측이 가지려는 경향이 매우 크다. 공모전 요강 중 일부는 일종의 계약서이다. 주최 측은 요강을 통해 저작권에 대한 견해를 분명히 밝히고 있는 데 반해, 개인은 계약서로 보기보다는 공모전에 출품하기 위한 형식이라고 단순하게 생각하는 경향이 있다. 이제는 공모전의 저작권에 대한 문제 제기가 필요한 시점이다. 기업의 콘텐츠 저작권만 보호하는 것이 중요한 것이 아니라 개인의 콘텐츠 저작권 또한 보호받고 존중받아야 한다는 점이다. 본 연구는 공모전 요강에서 드러나는 저작권 소유와 저작권 침해 항목을 분석함으로써 저작권에 대한 문제 제기를 하는 데 목적이 있다. 공모전의 저작권 조항은 계약서 역할을 한다. 공모전의 저작권 항목은 갑과 을의 관계인 주최 측과 수상자 모두가 이해하고 수용할 수 있는 내용이 바람직한 공모전의 방향이다. 이를 위해서 공공기관부터 개인 사업자까지 우월적인 지위를 가진 주최 측의 인식변화가 필요하다. 그러기 위해서는 첫 번째, 저작권의 표기: 분명하고 구체적인 용어를 사용해야 한다. 두 번째, 해석의 범위: 포괄적인 해석이 가능한 표기가 아닌 구체적인 표기를 해야 한다. 세 번째, 저작재산권의 대가: 주최 측이 수상작의 저작재산권 소유나 이용이 필요할 경우, 저작재산권의 권리 소유나 이용에 맞는 대가의 상금액을 고려한 적정한 재산적 사용의 권리를 표기해야 한다. 네 번째, 사용기간: 저작재산권의 사용기간을 표기해야 한다. 다섯 번째, 권리의 범위: 주최 측이 필요로 하는 저작재산권의 범위를 한정 표기해야 한다. 여섯 번째, 상호존중: 일방적 계약이 아닌 상호 배려와 존중에 입각한 쌍방계약의 개념으로 저작권 관련 항목을 표기해야 한다.

• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제67권
• /
• pp.1-21
• /
• 2015

U. N. Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods (hereinafter the 'CISG' or the 'Convention') has been in force more than 37 years. The CISG responds to the need for uniform sales law. First of all, the biggest barrier against the uniformity in sales law is so-called "homeward trend". Professor Honnold, who served as secretary of UNCITRAL during the time in which the CISG was developed, pointed out the danger of "homeward trend" like this in his Article. "One threat to international uniformity in interpretation is a natural tendency to read the international text through the lenses of domestic law." CISG Article 79 is the principal provision governing the extent to which a party is exempt from liability for a failure to perform any of his obligations due to an impediment beyond his control. So-called 'Manfred Forberich' decision regarding the article 79 represents the most extreme example of what is likely the most dangerous error that tribunals applying the CISG can make. CISG Article 79 only governs impossibility of performance, and there is a controversy whether a disturbance which does not fully exclude performance, but it considerably more difficult or onerous(hardship, change of circumstances, economic impossibility) can be considered as an impediment. Unlike PICC and PECL, the CISG governs contract of sale. Therefore, events such as a sudden increase in the price of raw materials or a dramatic devaluation of currency, will not allow the seller to avoid his liability for non-delivery of the goods or to require renegotiation of the terms of the contract of sale. We should bear in mind that the CISG should be interpreted and applied in the context of the CISG itself.