• The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy
• /
• v.5
• /
• pp.171-205
• /
• 1993

On the contrary to the general principle of private law, carriers' liability for passengers and cargo owners have been quantatively limited in some cases. The author traces the rule of liability limitation in the law of Korea and United States to verify two hypotheses. The first hypothesis is that the rule of liability limitation has been introduced to motivate investment when new technology with high risk has been adopted in business. The second hypothesis is that the rule of liability limitation can be maintained only when damages have been fully compensated. The former is a necessary condition for liability limation, and the latter sufficient condition. There are strong evidences for the first hypothesis. Navigation or aviation, artificial satellite lauching, urban transportation system are good examples. The second hypothesis is supported by the fact that there have been continuous controversies on the Warsaw System, including the failure of ratification of Montreal Additional Protocols No.3 & 4 by the U.S. Senate and voluntary removal of liability limitation by the Japanese airline companies. Loss of cargo can be compensated fully, but damages from personal injury and death not. The value of human body and life is not easy to be estimated. Passengers, moreover, do not usually buy insurance for accidents in travel. Passengers do not accept insurance premium as the cost of being whole and alive. They do not accept accident rates realistically. They have no bargaining power in dealing with insurers. The rule of liability limitation in personal losses would not be supported in future because damages have not fully compensated.

• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.15
• /
• pp.7-31
• /
• 2001

All legal systems set out the principle of full compensation of damages, which aims to fulfil the plaintiff's expectations by putting him into as good a position as he would have been in if the contract had been performed. On the other hand, they place some limitations on the full recoverability of damages for breach of contract. In Civil Law systems, 'fault' is a necessary requirement for liability for damages, and the extent of recoverable damages is directly related to the degree of the dependent's fault. This principle, however, is not adopted by Common Law systems, in which the dependent would be liable in damages for breach of contract even though the breach was not due to his fault. The CISG is in a similar position to the latter systems. In Common Law systems as well as CISG, the extent of liability of the party in breach for damages depends on whether he foresaw or could have foreseen the damages at the time of contracting. Unlike the position in Civil Law systems, foreseeability seems to be the most effective principle to decide the extent. The tests for remoteness centre on reasonable foreseeability or contemplation of the loss. The party in breach is liable even for loss indirectly caused to the other party provided that this loss was foreseeable or contemplated by the party in breach. However, this manner to decide remoteness may lead to unreasonable results in some cases. If the party in breach were the inveterate pessimist who foresaw all sorts of possible damages, he could foresee damages too remote from the breach of duty. If this fact were revealed in the course of trial, he should be liable for such indirect damages. This is really undesirable result. Therefore, as to the remoteness test, the criterion of whether the loss is foreseen or contemplated must not be adopted. Foreseeability by reasonable person must be the only available criterion.

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.10 no.1
• /
• pp.77-116
• /
• 2009

Owing to the development of Biotechnology, the involvement of humans in life before birth has been increasing. This means the need for the protection of unborn life takes on new importance. The respect for life and human beings which is based on fundamental constitutional principle should still be respected under civil law. This study examines how methods of respect for life are embodied in civil liability law. In particular, it enunciates the protection of unborn life within time-flow. Lastly, it studies the instruments of the civil liability law and the extent of protection for a fetus from the process of fertilization of an ovum by a sperm, development into an embryo and implantation. Especially, it looks into when and how the subject of the right changes. Besides, it critically scrutinizes the opinions of leading case lawyers and the Constitutional Court which conclude that, in order for a fetus to become the subject of Damage law, it is required to be born alive to comply with precedent. Furthermore, it suggests an alternative interpretation theory.

• Journal of the Korea Academia-Industrial cooperation Society
• /
• v.9 no.5
• /
• pp.1386-1391
• /
• 2008

The Korean Product Liability Act established the principle that a manufacturer has a duty to take care of a person who is not the customer who bought the product for him. In this instance, there is a duty to the patient for whom the product was purchased by the hospital from the pharmaceutical company. Therefore, the pharmaceutical company has the product liability for adverse reactions to the contrast medium. But the possibility for the patient to successfully sue the pharmaceutical company is quite low, because the patient needs to prove that a "defect" in the unsafe product was the cause of his injuries. And the physician or the radiological technologist can not reduce his liability risks based on the Product Liability Act. On the contrary, The has the product liability because diluting contrast medium belongs to the product category.

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.11 no.1
• /
• pp.59-84
• /
• 2010

Medical practice is characterized by various physiological response and uncapacity of prediction, therefore when medical accident occur it's hard to prove medical professionals' mistake. Though medical accident by medical professionals' mistake will be compensated anyhow, about irresistible medical accidents, no one should be not bound to compensate, victims get into very difficult situation. So, the nation don't negligent irresistible medical accidents but compensate anyway. As in the past, to the legal principle's constitution of irresistible medical accidents, theory of liability without fault was adapted, and it was said this theory was illogical in theory of liability with fault. But the subject of compensation to irresistible medical accidents is nation, nation don't participate in medical treatment therefore there is no room to occur mistake. And it is not reasonable to regard medical agency as a truster of public service, to cast to it responsibility of medical accidents. The problem of compensation to irresistible medical accidents is understood under the theory of social compensation. Social compensation is consisted of compensation to sacrifice and contribution to nation and society and compensation to sacrifice revealed under danger, the compensation to irresistible medical accidents belongs to the latter. This is near to concept of relief, is applied to national compensation system supplementarily, and compensation have no option but to compensate minimum. And there are not relation between national compensation system of irresistible medical accidents and proof liability transposition and theory of liability with out fault, merely in side of sharing responsibility burden between medical treater and victim, it is reasonable to discuss transportation of proof liability and compulsive liability insurance together.

• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.71
• /
• pp.147-170
• /
• 2016

International maritime law conventions concerned with cargo liabilities have sought to achieve solutions which will be acceptable to a wide range of states. The Rotterdam Rules was approved by the UN Assembly on 11 December 2008. The Rotterdam Rules are intended to replace The Hague and Hamburg Rules. This paper is comparing The Rotterdam Rules with The Hague and Hamburg Rules for the carrier' liabilities and exceptions in order to find carrier' liability System, the burden of proof and exceptions in the International maritime Rules. The purpose of this paper is considering the carrier's principal recourse for defending himself inmost cargo claims. The first area analyze the transfer of carrier's fundamental Liability system in the International Rules. The second is the matter on the appointment of proof in order to establish liability or to be relieve of liability. And the third is the change of the carrier's possible exclusions from liability in the International maritime Rules. From the result of the said analysis, my paper suggests differences of the exclusions in the Rotterdam Rules comparing with the Hague and Hamburg Rules, and features of the Rotterdam Rules appling exceptions on the basis of the Hague and Hamburg Rules with regard to carrier's liability and burden of proof. The former is the inclusion of three exclusions, the deleted natural fault, and The provision making the carrier responsible for the acts of its servants or agents in the 'fire on the ship' of the Rotterdam Rules. The latter is deleting the principle of overriding obligation related to carrier's obligation of seaworthiness in the Rotterdam Rules, the burden of proof being diverted from the carrier to the carrier and the shipper in the cargo damage caused by two factors(one for which the carrier was liable and the other for which it was excusable) in the new rules.

• The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy
• /
• v.18
• /
• pp.41-64
• /
• 2003

This paper describes the liability regime of the air carrier under the Montreal Convention of 1999 for the international cargo, comparing to those of the existing Warsaw system. Also this paper deals with main issues of the Montreal Convention which are relevent for the carrier's liability in the carriage of the air cargo. The Warsaw Convention was adopted in 1929 and modified successively in 1955, 1961, 1971, 1975, and 1999. The Montreal Convention of 1999 modernized and consolidated the Warsaw Convention and related instruments. The air carrier is liable by application of principle of strict liability as stated in the Montreal Convention : The carrier is liable for the destruction or loss of, or damage to cargo and delay during the carriage by air, and the carrier's liability is limited to a sum of 17 Special Drawing Rights per kilogramme. However, the Montreal Convention has some outstanding issues with respect to the liability of the air carrier : potential conflicts between the Montreal Convention and the Warsaw Convention, the amounts of limits of the carrier's liability, the duration of the carrier's liability, the exessive litigation, and the aviation insurance. Therefore, the conditions and limits of the carrier's liability under the Montreal Convention should be readjusted and regulated in detail.

• The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy
• /
• v.22 no.2
• /
• pp.27-51
• /
• 2007

The cumulative result of the work by the ICAO Secretariat, the Secretariat Study Group and the Council Special Group on the Modernization of the Rome Convention of 1952 are two draft Conventions, namely: "Draft Convention on Compensation for Damage Caused by Aircraft to Third Parties, in case of Unlawful Interference", and "Draft Convention on Compensation for Damage Caused by Aircraft to Third Parties" The core provisions of the former draft Convention are as follows: The liability of the operator is strict, that is, without the necessity of proof of fault. It would be liable for damage sustained by third parties on condition only that the damage was caused by an aircraft in flight(Article 3). However, such liability is caped based on the weight of the aircraft(Article 4). It is envisaged to create an independent organization called the Supplementary Compensation Mechanism, with the principle purpose to pay compensation to persons suffering damage in the territory of a State Party, and to provide financial support(Article 8). Compensation shall be paid by the SCM to the extent that the total amount of damages exceeds the Article 4 limits(Article 19). The main issues on the farmer draft Convention are relating to breaking away from Montreal Convention 1999, no limits on individual claims but a global limitation on air carrier liability, insurance coverage, cap of operators' strict liability, and Supplementary Compensation Mechanism. The core provisions of the latter draft Convention are as follows: the liability of the operator is strict, up to a certain threshold tentatively set at 250,000 to 500,000 SDRs. Beyond that, the operator is liable for all damages unless it proves that such damage were not due to its negligence or that the damages were solely due to the negligence of another person(Article 3). The provisions relating to the SCM and compensation thereunder do not operate under this Convention, as the operator is potentially for the full amount of damages caused. The main issues on the latter draft Convention are relating to liability limit of operator, and definition of general risks. In conclusion, we urge ICAO to move forward expeditiously on the draft Convention to establish a third party liability and compensation system that can stand ready to protect both third party victims and the aviation industry before another 9/11-scale event occurs.

• Journal of the Ergonomics Society of Korea
• /
• v.30 no.1
• /
• pp.9-17
• /
• 2011

Consumer products are produced on the premise that consumers can use their products safely and effectively no matter how serious human errors they may make. However, different careers and educational experiences of them may induce diverse human errors when they want to use them. In that sense, not a few policies to reduce human errors may show some implications for human error prevention and industrial design of consumer products. In this paper, producers' safety efforts required by Product Liability(PL) Act were reviewed in view of human error prevention, and legal aspects of manufacturers' responsibility for consumer products were discussed in relation to Product Liability Act. Then, principal approaches for them were introduced under the title of System Safety Precedence. After that, major key points for preventing human errors related with consumer products - such as ergonomic design and effective labeling - were discussed with reference to ISO standards. Therefore, it was shown that all the efforts required by PL Act would be correspondent to human error prevention in the whole manufacturing processes if understood by ergonomists. To make a conclusion, it could be said that, for human error prevention, the principle of System Safety Precedence would be indispensable, and that all the efforts for preventing human errors should be systematically organized in Product Safety Management Systems.

• Journal of Korea Trade
• /
• v.27 no.1
• /
• pp.176-191
• /
• 2023

Purpose - When recovered through arbitration a contractual penalty that is disproportionately high can become grounds for challenging an arbitral award or an obstacle to its enforcement within Russian jurisdiction. This article investigates how violation of the principle of proportionality can affect the enforcement and challenging of arbitral awards in Russia. Based on the examination of the current legislation, along with the analysis of recent court cases on the subject, the ultimate object of this article is to discern practical recommendations for Korean practitioners who are looking to challenge and/or enforce arbitral awards in Russian courts. Design/methodology - The research process included the reviewing of current Russian legislation conducted in concurrence with academic literature review, searching and analyzing recent court cases where the relevant legal provisions and concepts were applied, and formulating practical implications of the research at its final stage. Findings - Through its relation to the principle of fairness/justice the authors establish the connection between the principle of proportionality and the public policy of Russia. Analysis of recent court cases showed two conflicting trends of whether a disproportionate penalty can be considered a public policy violation. The authors offer practical recommendations on how to substantiate a relevant claim regarding contractual penalty reduction by the court, depending on the desired outcome. Originality/value - The article contains an up-to-date summary of the legal provisions on the principle of proportionality of civil liability in Russia and identifies the most recent trends in court practice on the issue that is not covered by existing studies.