• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제46권
• /
• pp.381-406
• /
• 2010

The enforcement of international arbitration raises a variety of procedural and related issues in national and international arbitral laws. In addition to the problems it is not easy to understand the rights and enforcement of interim measures by arbitral tribunal. Many countries and international rules allow the arbitral tribunal to submit the interim measures applied by a dispute party. However, interim measures are not recognised and enforced by itself in international commercial arbitration. It has not been completed in the rules of arbitration nationally and internationally. This is the reason why the confirmation of international and national laws is important to effect interim measures practically. In the case of Korean arbitral laws do not include articles of enforcement of interim measures even permit rights of decision of interim measures by arbitral tribunal in the national arbitral laws improperly and unreliably. This paper discuses the deficits of enforcement of interim measures which is submitted the type of award by the arbitral tribunal. The paper also points out and refers the revised model law of arbitration by UNCITRAL in 2006 which was changed to allow the interim award and should be imposed its enforcement of any types of interim measures by the arbitral tribunal in international commercial arbitration.

• 시큐리티연구
• /
• 제10호
• /
• pp.273-292
• /
• 2005

앞으로 민간경비는 민간차원의 범죄예방조직으로서 경찰력의 한계로 야기되는 국민생활의 안전문제를 해결하고 도시화와 산업화의 심화에 따른 각 계층의 다양한 방범수요를 충족시켜 줄 것으로 기대되고 있다. 현재 경찰력의 한계로 야기되는 치안공백의 상태를 자위권의 인식과 수익자부담원칙이라는 현대적 경비개념의 적용으로 지역 특성에 적합한 범죄예방 시스템을 운영하는 민간경비제도를 보다 적극적으로 활용하여 더욱 효율적인 공경비와 민간경비분야의 협력방안을 연구할 필요성이 제기되고 있다. 이 연구의 목적은 국내의 정세의 변화에 따른 국내 치안수요의 변화와 전망 등을 예측하여 보고, 특히 선진국의 민간경비 산업의 전망 등을 분석한 결과를 토대로 하여 공경비와 민간경비 상호 긴밀한 협력 체제를 구축하여 경찰의 방범업무 부담을 감소시키고, 민간경비의 권한과 지위를 향상시켜 날로 급증하는 치안수요 등의 치안 환경변화에 능동적으로 대처할 수 있도록 하고자 한다.

• Asian Pacific Journal of Cancer Prevention
• /
• 제17권2호
• /
• pp.829-833
• /
• 2016

Purpose: To investigate the work associated stress and nicotine dependence among law enforcement personnel in Mangalore, India. Materials and Methods: A cross-sectional questionnaire survey was conducted among law enforcement personnel in Mangalore, India. Demographic details, stress factors experienced at work and nicotine dependency were the variables studied. The extent of stress factors experienced at work was assessed using the Effort-Reward Imbalance scale (ERI). Nicotine dependence was measured using the Fagerstrom Test for Nicotine Dependence (FTND) and the Fagerstrom Test for Nicotine Dependence-Smokeless Tobacco (FTND-ST). Logistic regression was used for the statistical analysis. Results: Three hundred and four law enforcement personnel participated in the study, among whom 68 had the presence of one or more habits like tobacco smoking, tobacco chewing and alcohol use. The mean effort score was $15.8{\pm}4.10$ and the mean reward and mean overcommitment scores were $36.4{\pm}7.09$ and $17.8{\pm}5.32$ respectively. Effort/Reward ratio for the total participants was 1.0073 and for those with nicotine habit was 1.0850. Results of our study demonstrated no significant association between domains of ERI scale and presence of habits but work associated stress was associated with the presence of one or more habits. Compared to constables, head constables had 1.12 times higher risk of having a nicotine habit. Conclusions: Our study implies job designation is associated with nicotine habits. However, there was no association between work associated stress and nicotine dependence among law enforcement personnel in Mangalore.

• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제49권
• /
• pp.61-86
• /
• 2011

Korea Supreme Court has given thirty-nine time's judgments on enforcement of Arbitral awards for thirty-six arbitration cases and made four time's decision on the arbitration cases since Korea arbitration act was enacted in 1966. Most of the arbitration cases appealed to the Supreme Court was to obtain the recognition and enforcement of arbitral awards or to set aside the arbitral awards according to the Korea arbitration Act article 36 and article 37, by reason of (a) a party to the arbitration agreement was under some incapacity under the law applicable to him or the said agreement is not valid under the law to which the parties have subjected it, or failing any indication thereon, (b) a party making the application was not given proper notice of the appointment of the arbitrator or arbitrators or of the arbitral proceedings or was otherwise unable to present his case (c) the award deals with a dispute not contemplated by or not falling within the terms of the submission to arbitration, or contains decisions on matters beyond the scope of the submission to arbitration. However, 5 cases of these arbitral awards were refused to obtain the enforcement of Arbitral awards and have been cancelled finally by the Supreme Court only by the New York Convention of 1958.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제25권3호
• /
• pp.113-133
• /
• 2015

This article reviews some recent decisions of the Supreme People's Court (SPC) of the People's Republic of China (PRC) on the recognition and enforcement of several South Korean arbitral awards. It explains the implementation of the New York Convention in the PRC and in particular the so-called Report System under the current Mainland Chinese law and judicial practice. It identifies some deficiencies in the People's Courts' approaches to the application and interpretation of the New York Convention and argues that the Mainland Chinese courts should adopt the pro-enforcement principle in the determination of the relevant issues under the New York Convention. It proposes further enhancement of the Report System and that the current categorization of 'domestic, foreign-related and foreign' in the context of arbitration agreements and arbitral awards needs to be further reviewed and clarified by the SPC. Last but not the least, it recommends some steps that South Korean parties should take to enhance the enforceability of South Korean Arbitral Awards in Mainland China.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제31권1호
• /
• pp.107-127
• /
• 2021

Vietnam is an important country with many trade transactions with the Republic of Korea. Arbitration is a method of resolving disputes that can arise with the increase in trade transactions. It is essential to study the legal system and precedents of Vietnam on the approval and enforcement of foreign arbitral awards. Such is the case because the law in Vietnam and the court's position on the approval and enforcement of foreign arbitration awards issued by the courts depend on the possibility of realizing the parties' rights concerning their disputes. Therefore, it is of great value both theoretically and practically to analyze the exact differences between approval and the denial of approval. Vietnam has enacted the Commercial Arbitration Act, which replaces the previous Commercial Arbitration Decree and creates an arbitration-friendly environment that meets international arbitration standards. Regarding the approval and execution of foreign arbitration awards, the Commercial Arbitration Act, the Civil Procedure Act, the Civil Execution Act, and the Vietnam Foreign Arbitration Awards Approval and Enforcement Ordinance are regulated. Following these laws and regulations, the reasons for the approval, enforcement, and rejection of the arbitral award are specified. In accordance with these laws and inappropriate arbitration agreements, an arbitral award beyond the scope of its right of disposition, an arbitral tribunal, or the concerned parties could not be involved in a proceeding or an arbitral award if the involved party does not have an opportunity to exercise its rights lawfully. If the state agency in the forum does not recognize the arbitral award, the dispute is not subject to arbitration under Vietnamese law, or the arbitral award does not conform to the basic principles of Vietnamese law, the parties are not bound, and the foreign arbitration award is rejected for approval and execution.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제29권2호
• /
• pp.107-132
• /
• 2019

The arbitration procedure, which is a private trial, does not have a separate enforcement agency. Therefore, unless a party consents to the arbitration award and voluntarily fulfills the award, its execution is accomplished through the implementation of the national court. In particular, the decision in the foreign arbitration procedure will be refused or rejected for the arbitration award in case the proceedings of the law and procedure on which the judgment is based are caused by inconsistency with the domestic law or procedural defect. However, all foreign arbitration awards generally do not have to go through the approval process, and it will come into force with the arbitration award. In the case of Germany in the revision of the German Civil Procedure Act of 1996, the main provisions of the New York Convention concerning the ratification and enforcement of arbitration proceedings are reflected. Germany provides for the arbitration procedures in the arbitration proceedings of Book 10 of the Civil Procedure Act. Particularly, with Article 1061 in Book 10 Section 8 below, the approval and enforcement of foreign arbitrators shall be governed. Article 1061 has been referred to as "The New York Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Jurisdictions," Article 5 (1). The main reasons for approval and enforcement rejection are: (1) Reason for the acceptance or refusal of enforcement by request of the parties: Reason for failure of subjective arbitration ability, invalidation of arbitration agreement, collapse of attack or defense method, dispute not included in arbitration agreement, (2) Reasons for the approval and enforcement of arbitration considered by the competent authority of the arbitrator: violation of objective arbitration ability, violation of public order, but not based on the default of German statute.

• 통상정보연구
• /
• 제8권1호
• /
• pp.357-369
• /
• 2006

All over the country tries to clarify the content of 'Public Policy' in recognition and implementation of Foreign Arbitral Awards : it makes comments of the international consensus of Geneva Convention(1927), New York Convention(1958) and the UNCITRAL Model Law on Public Policy, and it takes a general view of domestic laws how they deal with Public policy and Foreign Arbitral Awards. Foreign Arbitral Awards should be appropriately respected and implementation by the courts of countries encourage parties in a legal procedure to refuse enforcement by invoking "Public Policy." In order to cope with such invocations, the purport of the above recommendation on Foreign Arbitral Awards should be internationally recognized and the exceptional circumstances should be restricted unless the International Court of Arbitral Awards is not established a Dr. Holtzmann/Schwebel brought forward. In this paper suggests the list of the exceptional circumstances. Korean Arbitration Law stipulates as the Civil proceeding Law did, "good morals and the social order of the Republic of Korea" as a ground for refusing enforcement of Arbitral Awards. Studies on counteraction against invocations of Public Policy to refuse enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards should be developed.

• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제62권
• /
• pp.87-109
• /
• 2014

This article examines the regime for the recognition, enforcement and execution of arbitral awards rendered under the auspices of the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes(ICSID). The effectiveness of international arbitration depends on the degree of finality of the award and the ease with which the award may be enforced by the prevailing part. The ICSID Convention provides for rigorous finality and seeks to establish optimal preconditions for the enforcement of awards in manner that distinguishes ICSID from other international arbitral regimes. As with other classes of disputes subject to judical or arbitral jurisdiction, most ICSID cases settle. In the cases that do proceed to award, participants must understand what will happen if the losing party fails to comply with the award voluntarily and the prevailing party takes the award through phases known as "recognition", "enforcement" and "execution". Investors should assess possible execution before finalizing investments and certainly before they initiate collection proceedings on ICSID awards. An investor with a monetary award in hand should attempt to locate assets of the losing State and then obtain comparative law advice to identify jurisdictions that allow attachment of at least certain categories of sovereign assets.

• 해양환경안전학회지
• /
• 제20권1호
• /
• pp.49-58
• /
• 2014

우리 배타적 경제수역에서는 불법조업과 폭력행위 등을 반복하는 중국어선을 단속하기 위한 우리 정부의 계속적인 노력에도 불구하고 배타적 경제수역에서의 불법조업행위는 멈추지 않고 오히려 단속 해양경찰의 피해가 속출하고 있다. 한편, 범정부적인 노력에도 불구하고 해양경찰의 불법외국조업선에 대한 단속 과정에서 여러 문제점이 노출되고 있다. 해양에서 외국선박에 대한 단속은 한편으로는 정당한 사법절차의 진행으로 당연한 국가의 권한이지만, 이러한 집행이 적절하지 못하게 이루어질 경우 국제적 분쟁이 발생할 가능성도 존재한다. 따라서 본 논문은 관련 자료, 전문가의 견해 및 최근 사건 등을 바탕으로 우리나라 관할수역에서 발생하는 불법조업 중국어선에 대한 검문 검색이나 사법절차의 진행 등 단속과정 진행 중 제기되는 문제점을 분석하고 이에 대한 해결방안을 제시하고자 한다.