• The Journal of Fisheries Business Administration
• /
• v.43 no.1
• /
• pp.63-74
• /
• 2012

The Korean Conflict of Laws Act recently incorporated much of the European Union's recent revision in "EC Convention on the Law Applicable to Contractual Obligations (Rome 1980)"(hereinafter Rome Convention). With the revision of Rome Convention applied to contractual obligations,"Regulation (EC) No 593/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 June 2008 on the law applicable to contractual obligations (Rome I)"(hereinafter Rome I) has taken effect on December 2009. Before the effectivation of Rome I, "Regulation (EC) No 864/2007 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 July 2007 on the law applicable to non-contractual obligations (Rome II)"(hereinafter Rome II) has come into effect on January 2009. This means the revision of certain rules and its practical implications need an in-depth study on governing law rules under Rome I which provides newly effected governing laws applicable to contractual obligations. Moreover, uniform choice of law rules on non-contractual obligations needs to focus especially on marine insurance contract. Where policy assignment and subrogation causes, how to decide the governing law which will be applied to the insurer as a third party? This article attempts to analyze emerging legal issues in legal regimes determining choice of law, especially those in international marine insurance contracts. This will help Korean practitioners to be dialed in legal affairs under English Law as the governing law in their contracts.

• Korean Architects
• /
• s.589
• /
• pp.160-175
• /
• 2018

• Korean Architects
• /
• s.642
• /
• pp.136-145
• /
• 2022

• Korea Trade Review
• /
• v.42 no.6
• /
• pp.1-25
• /
• 2017

This is a comparative and analytical study which comprises of the analysis of the rules of the seller's liability for non-conforming goods of four legal systems under the CISG and the CESL. A purpose of this study is to examine all the rules as to, first, the concept and the nature of the seller's duty to deliver the goods in conformity with the contract, second, the contents of the seller's duty to deliver the goods in conformity with the contract, third, the time when the goods must be in conformity with the contract and the cases where the seller is exempted from his liability for non-conforming goods. Another purpose is to compare the rules of the CISG with those of the CESL, 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 intend to use one of those regimes in their contract as a governing law.

• Korea Trade Review
• /
• v.48 no.3
• /
• pp.23-41
• /
• 2023

The seller and the buyer write down the agreed details in the trade contract as trade contract clauses. In the case where a letter of credit is agreed to be the payment condition, the buyer shall open a letter of credit to the seller with the shipping date specified in the trade contract through its bank. In this case, the legal relationship between the performance date of the trade contract and the shipment date of the letter of credit, the change of the performance date of the trade contract due to the change of the trade contract and the change of the shipment date specified in the letter of credit, the seller's letter of credit A problem arises in the legal interpretation of the approval period and the change request period. Therefore, this paper analyzed the precedents of the Seongnam Branch of the Suwon District Court and the Seoul High Court related to these legal issues. The performance date of a trade contract is the seller's delivery date and the buyer's payment date. In the letter of credit transaction, the date of performance of the trade contract is regarded as the date of shipment and the date of negotiation of documents specified in the letter of credit. The seller must decide whether to accept the letter of credit within 5 banking days after receiving the letter of credit from the buyer. After this period has elapsed, the seller cannot refuse the letter of credit. However, if the buyer is unable to decide whether to accept the letter of credit within 5 banking days due to reasons attributable to the buyer, the delivery date specified in the letter of credit will be extended. If the seller requests an amendment to the letter of credit, the buyer must accept it and open the letter of credit the seller desires to the seller. If the buyer refuses the seller's request to change the letter of credit, company A has the obligation to change and reopen the letter of credit as requested by company B. Expect by agreeing on the quotation As it is a fundamental breach of contract stipulated in Article 25 of the United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods, company B can cancel the trade contract and claim damages from company A. Compensation for damages caused by Company A's breach of the trade contract shall be an amount equal to the loss suffered by Company B as a result of the breach, including loss of profits.

• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.23 no.2
• /
• pp.115-139
• /
• 2013

In the area of legal studies, negotiation can be taught as a profession skill in legal matters such as making negotiating a contract or resolving disputes including alternative dispute resolution. Given recent changes in the legal services market such as the opening of the market, expected higher competition in the legal profession and a high expectation for lawyers' role in society, negotiation skills are an important element of legal expertise that should be developed in law schools. The main purpose of negotiation training should be to make law school students aware of their role as lawyers to help their clients resolve their problems using their legal expertise and negotiation skills in an appropriate and effective way.

• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.59
• /
• pp.3-26
• /
• 2013

The purpose of this paper is to examine the several points at issue in international technology transfer contract from licensor's and licensee's perspectives, and to refer them when the licensor and the licensee draw up the contract. This author analyzed the critical points of the related provisions of ICC Model International Technology Transfer Contract(2009) by citing the explanations of the Introduction of the Model Contract. The provisions of the Model Contract are generally divided into two categolies; specific conditions and general conditions. This author selected four topics in the specific conditions; Contents of the Contract, Royalty, Modification and/or Improvements of Products, and Territory and Competition. Likewise this author selected three topics in the general conditions; Resolutions of Disputes, Applicable Law and Taxes. Both parties need to be mindful of the following points in the above topics, when they draw up the contract. First, both parties should make the definitions of special terminologies clear, which are included in the Contract. Second, before the parties sign the Contract, they should check any approvals to be necessary by the both countries' governments. Third, for the calculation of the royalty, they should clear the criteria, the scope, and the object. Fourth, as the local laws or regional laws regarding the territory limitation and taxation are mandatory, any provisions of the Contract should not be inconsistent with them. Therefore, both parties should check before-hand the local laws or rules related with the provisions of the Contract. Fifth, when the parties draw up the Contract, they should examine the Provisions of Dispute Resolution in consideration of the Governing Law. Thus both parties decide to make the technology transfer contract, the three aspects namely profitability, legal conflict with mandatory rules, and sustainability of the business resulting from the Contract should be examined in advance, and then proceed the business using the technology transfer.

• Journal of Korea Trade
• /
• v.24 no.6
• /
• 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.

• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.54
• /
• pp.167-190
• /
• 2012

The purpose of this study is to find out some countermeasure to Korean companies entered Chinese market through analyzing an arbitration case resolved by CIETAC applied of Chinese Commission Agency Law and CISG. China create legal relationship between the principal and the third party under Chinese Consignment Contract Law. Korean companies so make sure whether this Contract is included when they conclude international commercial contract. If yes, they have to prove their recognition for the relationship between the principal and the commission agent when needed. If the parties agreed an additional period of time of delivery and the seller do not deliver the goods within this period, this breach might be regarded as fundamental nature and the buyer could declare the contract avoided. In addition, late delivery might also be regarded as fundamental breach when market price is fluctuated. It is understandable that attorney's fees is recoverable one, but it is not understandable that arbitrator's extra expenses such as travel and accommodation expenses is not recoverable with the reason that arbitrator comes outside of the country.

• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.77
• /
• pp.23-42
• /
• 2018

This study compares the SGA and CISG to find out the difference of the criteria for calculating damages. and it intends to give some important points in trade practice. The damages is intended to compensate the victim for the breach of contract but there are differences between SGA and CISG as follow. First, the SGA and CISG have the same purpose of claiming damages. Both laws and regulations are subject to a full indemnification to compensate for the breach of the contract by the amount equivalent to the loss suffered by the victim. Second, in the general principle related to the calculation of damages, both law enforcement officials are required to be able to predict damages caused by breach of contract. In the case of SGA, however, a foreseeability test or remoteness of damages is required for the relationship between the contract violation and the loss. In other words, it can be said that the causal relation between the contract violation and the damage is strictly applied rather than the CISG. Finally, both laws and regulations of SGA and CISG have a big difference in criteria for calculating damages. In the CISG, after the contract is canceled, it is classified according to the existence of the alternative transaction and the damage amount is calculated based on the contract price. On the other hand, the SGA estimates the loss based on the market price at the delivery of the goods, reflecting the change in the market price instead of the contract price of the goods.