• 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.

• 항공우주정책ㆍ법학회지
• /
• 제30권1호
• /
• pp.95-116
• /
• 2015

항공운송계약은 객체에 따라 항공여객운송계약과 항공물건운송계약으로 분별된다. 항공운송 사고는 인적 물적 피해를 수반하기 때문에 피해의 분석을 다각도로 접근할 필요가 있으며, 항공운송인의 손해배상책임 논의는 크게 (1) 원인 사유, (2) 제한 사유, (3) 면제 사유로 나눠볼 수 있다. 우리 상법에서 손해배상책임의 소멸을 위한 면제사유는 조약과 국내법이 혼재되어 있는바 이에 대한 가늠이 필요하다. 상법과 항공운송 관련 조약은 항공운송인은 여객의 연착으로 인한 손해에 대하여 항공운송인측이 손해를 방지하기 위해 합리적으로 요구되는 모든 조치를 취하였다는 것 또는 조치를 취하는 것이 불가능하였다는 점을 증명한 경우에는 책임이 면제된다. 그래서 어떠한 경우에 합리적으로 요구되는 모든 조치의 요건을 달성하였는지가 문제이다. 개정 상법 항공운송편은 국제항공운송에서 세계적으로 활용되는 조약들의 내용을 우리 실정에 맞게 반영하여 국제적 기준에 맞으면서 체계상으로도 육상 해상 항공운송을 포괄하는 특징을 갖고 있다. 그러나 상법은 운송계약상 항공운송인의 손해배상책임 문제를 규율하는 몬트리올 협약을 주로 반영하면서 동 협약이 가지고 있던 문제들도 그대로 안게 되었으므로 국내 상황에 맞게 변형 및 생략을 통해 동 협약의 규정을 수용함으로 인해 발생하는 문제들도 생겨나게 되었다. "상법" 제907조 제1항 제909조 제914조에서의 '합리적으로 요구되는 모든 조치'에 대한 분석이 필요하다. 항공운송으로 인한 손해에 관하여 항공운송인에게 기산일로터 2년 내에 재판상 청구가 없으면 항공운송인의 책임은 소멸하는데 이와 같은 2년의 제소기간은 국내법상 어떤 의미로 해석되는지 여부와 연장이나 중단은 합리적인 주의와 사고방지를 위한 적극적인 조치를 다하는 것으로 판단해야 할 것이다.

• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제12권
• /
• pp.461-494
• /
• 1999

This study is to analyse the applicability of governing law in multi-party contractual relationship of letter of credit. And this study is also to suggest the limits of the possibility of applicable law in multi-party contract. The contract of letter of credit constitutes complex relationship, i.e., applicant -beneficiary, applicant-issuing bank, issuing bank-intermediary bank ect. The law applicable to letter of credit should not use a singular governing law in all credit transaction as sales contract. To solve these problems, the author analysed the law applicable to the credit under multi-party contractual relationship as follow : (1) the principle of party autonomy (2) In the absence of express agreement with regard to the law applicable to the contract, lex loci contractus, lex loci solutionis, the law intended by the parties, the law with which contract is most closely connected. Accordingly, when attempting to ascertain the law governing the credit, it should be borne in mind that the credit involves several contractual relationships. I would like to conclude as follows: 1. The contract between the applicant and the Issuing bank is to be governed by the law of the country where the contract is made, and in which the bank carries on business and has issued the credit. 2. When it comes to the beneficiary-Intermediary bank relationship the following rule is given : The liability of an intermediary bank to the seller is governed by the law the country where the intermediary bank is operating if it is acting as principal. If, however, it is acting as agent(advising bank), it will be the law of the country where his principal is situate. 3. The contract between the beneficiary and the Issuing bank is governed by the law of the country where the payment is to be performed. 4. The contract between the Issuing bank and Intermediary bank is governed by 1) the law of the issuing bank is applicable if the intermediary bank only advises the credit, 2) the law of the issuing bank is applicable but if the intermediary bank makes payment, accepts or negotiates drafts against the tender of the documents, i.e., act as the bank dffecting the payment., 3) the law of the confirming bank is applicable if the irrevocable letter of credit is confirmed by the intermediary bank

• 대한방사선기술학회지:방사선기술과학
• /
• 제30권2호
• /
• pp.89-93
• /
• 2007

조영제를 사용한 방사선과 검사의 조영제 부작용에 대한 위험성은 잘 알려져 있으며, 조영제의 부작용을 줄이기 위한 연구도 지속적으로 진행되어 왔다. 또한 조영제 부작용에 대한 사전검사를 하더라도 조영제에 의한 치명적 부작용을 예측하기 어렵다. 이러한 조영제 부작용에 대한 법적책임에 대하여 최근에는 의료기관개설자의 책임이 중요시되고 있다. 의료기관은 환자의 건강을 목적으로 하는 조직체이다. 그리고 조직체는 그 구성원에 의한 과실에 책임이 있다. 그러므로 의료기관개설자는 의료서비스에 대해서 기대가능한 모든 노력을 하여야 하며, 불충분 또는 불완전한 조직편성 및 진료조치가 이루어지지 않게 하여야 할 조직의무를 부담한다. 이러한 점에서 의료기관은 방사선조영검사시에 조영제를 주입하는 단계로부터 검사의 완료에 이르기까지 전과정에 충분하고도 완전한 조직편성과 적정한 진료 확보를 위한 제반조치를 취할 책임이 있다. 따라서 환자의 안전과 진료의 적정을 위하여 의료기관이 조직적으로 필요한 조치를 시행하지 않거나 불충분한 경우에는 불법행위법상 의료기관 독자적인 조직책임을 지게 되며, 의료기관의 조직의무위반은 의료기관 자신의 책임이므로 내부관계에서 의료기관종사자 개인에게 구상권을 행사할 수 없다.

• 한국건축시공학회지
• /
• 제3권2호
• /
• pp.95-102
• /
• 2003

Financial difficulties and claims frequently stop construction works and cause subsequent contract cancellations. However, as the criteria to assess costs have not been established, many cases of legal disputes over the assessment of cancellation costs are taking place and the concerned parties are suffering the loss of time and money. Therefore, the present research aimed at developing a rational and systematic model of cancellation cost assessment following the cancellation of contracts. The research was carried out in the following methods and scopes. 1 ) The research was focused on the assessment of fair cancellation costs from constructors' side for contracts cancelled by any causes for which the owners have liability. 2) To obtain basic materials about cancellation cost assessment methods, contracts, claims, contract cancellations and construction-related laws at home and abroad were examined. 3) A cost assessment model was developed for systematization and efficient operation of cancellation cost assessment, and the reliability and efficiency of the proposed model was verified through a case study. The conclusions drawn from the research are as follows. The importance of the cancellation cost assessment model was confirmed as, using the cancellation cost assessment model, direct cancellation cost and indirect cancellation cost could be assessed systematically, the number of disputable items could be reduced because reasonable evidences of actual spending were presented, and the loss of constructors could be minimized because systematic and rational cost assessment became possible for many disputable cases of indirect cancellation cost, which the constructors had been unable to prove so far though having spent.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제31권4호
• /
• pp.119-136
• /
• 2021

Due to the restriction of movement caused by the Corona epidemic and the expansion of the "big face" through human distance, the "unmanned system" based on artificial intelligence and the Internet of Things has been widely used in modern life. "Self-driving," one of the transportation systems based on artificial technology, has taken the initiative in the transportation system as the spread of Corona has begun. Self-driving technology eliminates unnecessary contact and saves time and manpower, which can significantly impact current and future transportation. Accidents may occur, however, due to the performance of self-driving technology during transportation albeit the U.S. allows ordinary people to drive automatically through experimental operations, and the product liability law will resolve the dispute. Self-driving has become popular in the U.S. after the experimental stage, and in the event of a self-driving accident, product liability should be applied to protect drivers from complicated self-driving disputes. The purpose of this paper is to investigate whether disputes caused by defects in ordinary cars can be resolved through arbitration through U.S. precedents and to investigate whether disputes caused by defects in autonomous cars can be arbitrated.

• Journal of Korea Trade
• /
• 제25권2호
• /
• pp.152-177
• /
• 2021

Purpose - This study analyses the excepted requirement and burden of proof of the carrier due to unseaworthiness through comparison between the marine transport contract and marine insurance contract. Design/methodology - This study uses the legal analytical normative approach. The juridical approach involves reviewing and examining theories, concepts, legal doctrines and legislation that are related to the problems. In this study a literature analysis using academic literature and internet data is conducted. Findings - The burden of proof in case of seaworthiness should be based on presumed fault, not proved fault. The burden of proving unseaworthiness/seaworthiness should shift to the carrier, and should be exercised before seeking the protections of the law or carriage contract. In other words, the insurer cannot escape coverage for unfitness of a vessel which arises while the vessel is at sea, which the assured could not have prevented in the exercise of due diligence. The insurer bears the burden of proving unseaworthiness. The warranty of seaworthiness is implied in hull, but not protection and indemnity policies. The 2015 Act repeals ss. 33(3) and 34 of MIA 1906. Otherwise the provisions of the MIA 1906 remain in force, including the definition of a promissory warranty and the recognition of implied warranties. There is less clarity about the position when the source of the loss occurs before the breach of warranty but the actual loss is suffered after the breach. Nonetheless, by s.10(2) of the 2015 Act the insurer appears not to be liable for any loss occurring after the breach of warranty and before there has been a remedy. Originality/value - When unseaworthiness is identified after the sailing of the vessel, mere acceptance of the ship does not mean the party waives any claims for damages or the right to terminate the contract, provided that failure to comply with the contractual obligations is of critical importance. The burden of proof with regards to loss of damage to a cargo caused by unseaworthiness is regulated by the applicable law. For instance, under the common law, if the cargo claimant alleges that the loss or damage has been caused by unseaworthiness, then he has the burden of proof to establish the followings: (i) that the vessel was unseaworthy at the beginning of the voyage; and that, (ii) that the loss or damage has been caused by such unseaworthiness. In other words, if the warranty of seaworthiness at the inception of the voyage is breached, the breach voids the policy if the ship owner had prior knowledge of the unseaworthy condition. By contrast, knowingly permitting the vessel to break ground in an unseaworthy condition denies liability only for loss or damage proximately caused by the unseaworthiness. Such a breach does not, therefore, void the entire policy, but only serves to exonerate the insurer for loss or damage proximately caused by the unseaworthy condition.

• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제58권
• /
• pp.3-33
• /
• 2013

The purpose of this paper is to examine the problems in exercising buyer's right to claim damages for the breach of contract by the seller in international sales contract and to suggest reasonable counter-measures. The main contents are as follows: First, this author analyzed the principles of the seller's liability for damages in detail and examined the methods for the calculation of damages on the basis of Arts.74~77. As these articles are found to be insufficient in practical application, this author further examined the UNIDROIT Principles(2004) to confirm whether these Principles can fill the gaps of CISG or not, which turned out their gap-filling functions. Second, this author tried to find any expected problems when the buyer resorts to the right to claim damages in case of the seller's breach of contract including the estimation of damages, the burden of proof, causation, the proof of appropriateness for avoidance, the proof of buyer's obligation to mitigate the loss and so on. The reason is that these problems may cause a lot of difficulties in real business. As result, many buyers have given up their reasonable rights to claim damages so far. Finally, from the buyer's perspective, this author would like to suggest a liquidated damage clause(LD Clause) which gives the buyer to received a specified sum in case of seller's non-performance and/or a demand guarantee(or standby L/C) which guarantees buyer to secure unconditional payment independent of the underlying contract. For these purposes, the buyer should try to insert the LD Clause and/or Guarantee Clause in the contract when the buyer and the seller negotiate the sales contract. Also there are a lot of considerations and limitations in using the LD Clause and the Guarantee Clause in their real business, mainly dependent up bargain power between the seller and the buyer, for which this author promise to examine in detail in the future.

• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제55권
• /
• pp.209-240
• /
• 2012

Since the age of Lord Mansfield, who laid the foundation of the modern English insurance contract law in the second part of the 18th century, English insurance law has developed a unique rule of warranty. Lord Mansfield adopted very different approach and afforded such a strict legal character to insurance warranty, because the promise, given by the insured, played an important role for the insurer to assess the scope of the risk insured at that time. It is still important that the insured keep his promises strictly to the insurer under the insurance contract, but legal environments have changed dramatically since the times of Lord Mansfield. English Law Commission proposed some proposals for reforming the warranty regime to reflect the changes of legal environment in CP 2007. This article is, therefore, designed to examine the proposals and consider their legal and practical implications. The proposals of Law Commission is summarized as following. First, in CP 2007, Law Commission made two principal proposals for reform of the law on warranty. The first is that the insurer should not be entitled to rely on a breach of warranty unless the insured has been provided with a witten statement of what they have undertaken under warranty. The second is that the insurer should not be entitled to reject a claim on the ground that the insured has breached a warranty unless there was a causal connection between the breach and the loss. Secondly, for consumer insurance, the rule requiring a causal connection would be mandatory, whereas for business insurance, it would be possible for the parties to agree on the effect a breach of warranty should have, provided they use clear language to express their intentions. Thirdly, where the insured contracted on the insurer's written standard terms of business, some statutory controls would be afforded to the contract to ensure that the cover was not substantially different from what the insured reasonably expected. Finally, Law Commission propose that a breach of warranty give the insurer the right to terminate the contract, rather than automatically discharging it from liability, but (unless otherwise agreed) only if the breach has sufficiently serious consequences to justify termination under the general law of contract. Having evaluated the proposals of the Law Commission and considered their legal and practical implications, it is quite clear that the proposed rule interfere with freedom of contract and create legal uncertainty. But change can not made without any victims, so Law Commission's attempt to change severe and injust aspects of the warranty regime would be very welcomed and respected.

• 해사법연구
• /
• 제29권2호
• /
• pp.115-144
• /
• 2017

2007년 미국에서 시작된 글로벌 금융위기의 영향은 국내의 해운 조선 분야에도 크게 영향을 미쳤다. 이와 관련하여 국내 조선소는 해운경기 악화로 인한 상선 수주물량 감소의 대체수단으로 여러 방면에서 수주전략을 수립하였고, 선택한 분야가 해양플랜트였다. 그러나 국내 조선소는 해양플랜트 관련 계약이 갖고 있는 위험성 분석에 대한 대비 없이 단순한 매출액 확대와 일감확보를 위한 무리한 영업 수주전략을 추진하였다. 이러한 결과, 해양플랜트 발주자와 초기에 계약한 금액보다 많은 비용이 투입되거나 제조물 인도지연에 따른 지체상금을 지급해야 하는 법적인 문제로 확대되었다. 주요 법적분쟁의 원인은 해양플랜트공사 시 발생할 수 있는 비선형모델에 의한 위험성 분석, 공정관리의 미숙, 국내 조선소가 "Engineering Procurement Construction 일괄계약"을 사용하는 해양플랜트공사계약의 이해 부족에 기인한다. 특히, 위험성 관리 항목의 한 요소로써 계약상의 독소조항에 대한 충분한 검토가 이루어지지 않은 점에 있다. 이러한 계약서를 검토할 만한 인력도 부재하다. 따라서 이 연구에서는 계약목적물의 인도지연이 발생할 수 있는 구체적 위험성의 존재를 식별하고, 해양플랜트공사계약 상에는 어떠한 불공정조항이 존재하며, 그러한 불공정조항이 실제 양 당사자에게 어떻게 적용되는지를 국내 조선소의 프로젝트 관리자의 인터뷰와 선행연구를 참조하여 구체적 위험요소가 계약상으로 어떻게 함의되는가에 대해서 살펴보았다. 이를 통하여 해양플랜트공사계약상 제조물인도지연에 관한 계약당사자의 법적 책임관계와 국내 조선 해양플랜트 산업발전에 기여할 수 있는 개선방안을 도출하였다.