• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.73
• /
• pp.65-90
• /
• 2017

The rule of warranty in English insurance law was established in the second part of the $18^{th}$ century by Lord Mansfield, who laid the foundations of the modern English law of insurance contract and developed very different rule of insurance law, especially in the field of warranty. At the time of Lord Mansfield, warranty, that is, the promise given by the assured, played an important role for the insurer to assess the scope of the risk. Legal environments, however, have changed since the age of Lord Mansfield. English and Scottish Commissions proposed very dramatic reform of law in the field of warranty law to reflect the changes of legal environment through the Insurance Act 2016. This article intends to consider the legal implications through the comparative analysis between the new regime of warranty in the Insurance Act 2015 and MIA 1906. The major changes in the Insurance Act 2015 are summarized as following. First, Basis of the contract clauses in non-consumer insurance contracts should be of no effect and representations should not be capable of being converted into warranties by means of a policy term or statement on the proposal form. This requirement should not be capable of being avoided by the use of a contract term and the arrangement of contracting out by parties should be of no effect. Secondly, The existing remedy for breach of warranty, that is, automatic discharge of the insurer's liability, should be removed. Instead, the insurer's libility should be suspended from the point of breach of warranty and reattach if and when a breach of warranty has been remedies. Thirdly, A breach of warranty should genally be regarded as remedied where the insured ceases to be in breach of it. In the other hand, for time-specific warranties which apply at or by an ascertainable time, a breach should be regarded as remedies, if the risk to which the warranty relates later, becomes essentially the same as that originally contemplated by the parties. Fourthly, where a term of an insurance contract relates to a particular kind of loss, or loss at a particular location/time, the breach of that term should only give the remedy in relation to loss of that particular kind of loss, or at a particular location/time. Finally, whether a term of an insurance contrat relates to loss of a particular kind of at a particular location/time should be determined objectively, based on whether compliance with that ther would tend to reduce the risk of the occurrence of that category of loss.

• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.55
• /
• 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.

• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.67
• /
• pp.119-142
• /
• 2015

Many insurers have traditionally incorporated "fraud clauses" into insurance policies, setting out the consequences of making a fraudulent claim. Even in the absence of an express terms, English courts provide insurers with a remedy for a fraudulent claim. However, the law in this area is complex, convoluted and confused. English Law Commission think that the law in this area needs to be reformed for three reasons; (1) the disjunctive between the common law rule and section 17 generates unnecessary disputes and litigation, (2) increasingly, UK commercial law must be justified to an international insurance society, and (3) the rules on fraudulent claims are functioned as a deterrent if they are clear and well-understood. In order for these purposes, English Law Commission recommends a statutory regime to the effect that, when an insured commits fraud in relation to a claim, the insurer should (1) have no liability to pay the fraudulent claim and be able to recover any sums already paid in respect to the claim, and (2) have the option to treat the contract as having been terminated with from the time of the fraudulent act and, if chosen the option, be entitled to refuse all claims arising after the fraud, but (3) remain liable for legitimate losses before the fraudulent act. LC is not recommending a complete restatement of the law on insurance fraud generally. For example, LC does not seek to define fraud, instead, recommends the introduction of targeted provisions to confirm the remedies available to an insurer who discovers a fraud by a policyholder.

• The Southeast Asian review
• /
• v.23 no.1
• /
• pp.235-276
• /
• 2013

Recent incidents of lethal violence in the Rakhine State of Myanmar between the majority Buddhist Rakhine and the Muslim Rohingya have been the source of much concern for the international community. Unlike the past, the killings and incendiary attacks by both communities have intensified to a critical level, proving to be a great liability for the forward-thinking Myanmar government, whose recent transition to civilian rule after a long military one has made it eager to move on. The roots of the conflict trace back to the military regime, who branded the Rohingyas living in Rakhine state as illegal immigrants and refused to confer upon them official recognition as Myanmar citizens. The discord then moved to an ethnic conflict, pitting the Rohingya not merely against the Myanmar government but rather the majority Buddhist Rakhine. The conflict, as it has developed into the present, is an immensely complicated one that simultaneously encompasses ethnic and religious issues, all intertwined together. This study aims to see how the two ethnic groups have come to resort to such violence, despite having lived in each other's presence for many centuries, and why the violence persists. It will attempt to reconcile the fact that Rakhine had historically been a place of convergence for two groups, the Buddhist Rakhine and the Rakhine Muslim(the Rohingya). Based on the argument, this study also seeks to uncover, identify, and understand the Rohingya identity with the extreme arguments exhibited by both sides, and from there, locate the underlying causes of the greater religio-ethnic conflict in Rakhine that has so ravaged the place as of recent.

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.18 no.1
• /
• pp.103-141
• /
• 2017

The (Korean) Medical Services Act revised in 2009 introduces the accreditation of specialty hospital. When a hospital meets prescribed standards, passes a board review, and is accredited as a specialty hospital by the Minister of Health and Welfare, then it may use 'specialty hospital' in its name and certification mark of specialty hospital. The problem is that the (Korean) Fair Trade Commission and the (Korean) Ministry of Health and Welfare, both of which have authorities to regulate advertising in general and in health care service in turn, announced the guidelines to prohibit internet (portal) service providers to provide keyword search ads service using key-words such as 'specialty' or 'specialized in' for those who are not accredited by the Minister of Health and Welfare. In this article, whether these guidelines can be justified by the current regime and whether the current specialty hospital policy is agreeable would be examined. To do this, the legal nature of accreditation of specialty hospital, the limit of advertisement regulation, the law of keyword search ads, and the liability of internet service providers also would be analyzed.

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.17 no.2
• /
• pp.177-219
• /
• 2016

A commercial advertisement is not only a way of competition but also a medium of communication. Thus, it is under the constitutional protection of the freedom of business (article 15 of the Constitution) as well as the freedom of press [article 21 (1) of the Constitution]. In terms of the freedom of business or competition, it should be noted that an unfair advertising (false or misleading advertisement) can be regulated as an unfair competition, while any restraint on advertising other than unfair one might be doubted as an unjustifiable restraint of trade. In terms of the freedom of press or communication, it is important that article 21 (2) of the Constitution forbids any kind of (prior) censorship, and the Constitutional Court applies this restriction even to commercial advertising. In this article, the applicability of these schemes to advertising of the so-called learned professions, especially physician, are to be examined, and some proposals for the reformation of the current regulatory regime are to be made. Main arguments of this article can be summarized as follows: First, the current regime which requires advance review of physician advertising as prescribed in article 56 (2) no. 9 of Medical Act should be reformed. It does not mean that the current interpretation of article 21 of the Constitution is agreeable. Though a commercial advertising is a way of communication and can be protected by article 21 (1) of the Constitution, it should not be under the prohibition of censorship prescribed by article 21 (2) of the Constitution. The Constitutional Court adopts the opposite view, however. It is doubtful that physician advertising needs some prior restraint, also. Of course, there exists severe informational asymmetry between physicians and patients and medical treatment might harm the life and health of patients irrevocably, so that medical treatment can be discerned from other services. It is civil and criminal liability for medical malpractice and duty to inform and not regulation on physician advertising, to address these differences or problems. Advance review should be abandoned and repelled, or substituted by more unproblematic way of regulation such as an accreditation of reviewed advertising or a self-regulation preformed by physician association independently from the Ministry of Health and Welfare or any other governmental agencies. Second, the substantive criteria for unfair physician advertising also should correspond that of unfair advertising in general. Some might argue that a learned profession, especially medical practice, is totally different from other businesses. It is performed under the professional ethics and should not persue commercial interest; medical practice in Korea is governed by the National Health Insurance system, the stability of which might be endangered when commercial competition in medical practice be allowed. Medical Act as well as the condition of medical practice market do not exclude competition between physicians. The fact is quite the opposite. Physicians are competing even though under the professional ethics and obligations and all the restrictions provided by the National Health Insurance system. In this situation, regulation on physician advertising might constitute unjustifiable restraint of competition, especially a kind of entry barrier for 'new physicians.'

• The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy
• /
• v.1
• /
• pp.223-243
• /
• 1989

The practical application of modern space science and technology have resulted in many actual and potential gains of mankind. These successes have conditioned and increased the need for a viable space law regime and the challenge of space has ultimately led to the formation of an international legal regime for space. Space law is no longer a primitive law. It is a modern law. Yet, in its stages of growth, it has not reached the condition of perfection. Therefore, under the existing state of thing, we could carefully say that the space law is one of the most newest fields of jurisprudence despite the fact that no one has so far defined it perfectly. However, if space law can be a true jurisprudential entity, it must be definable. In defining the space law, first of all, the grasp of it's nature iis inevitable. Although space law encompasses many tenets and facets of other legal discriplines, its principal nature is public international law, because space law affects and effects law relating intercourse among nations. Since early 1960s when mankind was first able to flight and stay in outer space, the necessity to control and administrate the space activities of human beings has growingly increased. The leading law-formulating agency to this purpose is the United Nation's ad hoc Committee on Peaceful Uses of Outer Space("COPUOS"). COPUOS gave direction to public international space law by establishing the 1963 Declaration of Legal Principles Governing the Activities of the States in the Exploration and Use of Outer Space("1963 Declaration"). The 1963 Declaration is very foundation of the five international multilateral treaties that were established successively after the 1963 Declaration. The five treaties are as follows: 1) The Treaty on Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and Use of Outer Space including Moon and other Celestial Bodies, 1967. 2) The Agreement on the Rescue of Astronauts, the Return of Astronauts, and the Return of Objects Launched into Outer Space, 1968. 3) The Convention on International Liability for Damage Caused by Space Objects, 1972. 4) The Convention on Registration of Objects Launched into Outer Space, 1974. 5) The Agreement Governing Activities of States on the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies: Moon Treaty, 1979. The other face of space law is it's commercial aspect. Space is no longer the sole domination of governments. Many private enterprise have already moved directly or indirectly into space activities in the parts such as telecommunications and space manufacturing. Since space law as the public international law has already advanced in accordance with the developments of space science and technology, there left only a few areas untouched in this field of law. Therefore the possibility of rapid growth of space law is expected in the parts of commerical space law, as it is, at this time, in a nascent state. The resources of the space environment are also commercially both valuable and important since the resources include the tangible natural resources to be found on the moon and other celestial bodies. Other space-based resources are solar energy, geostationary and geosynchronous orbital positions, radio frequencies, area possibly suited to human habitations, all areas and materials lending themselves to scientific research and inquiry. Remote sensing, space manufacturing and space transportation services are also another potential areas in which commercial. endeavors of Mankind can be carried out. In this regard, space insurance is also one of the most important devices allowing mankind to proceed with commercial space venture. Thus, knowlege of how space insurance came into existence and what it covers is necessary to understand the legal issues peculiar to space law. As a conclusion the writer emphasized the international cooperation of all nations in space activities of mankind, because space commerce, by its nature, will give rise many legal issues of international scope and concern. Important national and world-community interests would be served over time through the acceptance of new international agreements relating to remote sencing, direct television broadcasting, the use of nuclear power sources in space, the regularization of the activities of space transportation systems. standards respecting contamination and pollution, and a practical boundary between outer space and air space. If space activity regulation does not move beyond the national level, the peaceful exploration of space for all mankind will not be realized. For the efficient regulation on private and governmental space activities, the creation of an international space agency, similar to the International Civil Aviation Organization but modified to meet the needs of space technology, will be required. But prior to creation of an international organization, it will be necessary to establish, at national level, the Office of Air and Space Bureau, which will administrate liscence liscence application process, safety review and sale of launch equipment, and will carry out launch service.

• The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy
• /
• v.26 no.1
• /
• pp.215-239
• /
• 2011

We are now entering the era of Commercial Space Transportation with the rapid commercialization of space. Commercial Space Tourism will be realized first of all in the commercial space transportation and the spacecraft is developing for it led by private enterprise such as Virgin Galatic and XCOR Aerospace. The spacecraft for space tourism is developed as Reusable Launch Vehicle(RLV). RLV Spaceship I & II manufactured by the Scaled Composites for Virgin Galatic had completed experimental flight successfully and is going to put to the operation for space travel around the year 2012. In our country, Yecheon Astro-Space Center located in Yecheon, Kyungbuk Province, signed a binding-MOU with XCOR Aerospace and going to start space travel in the year 2013 with the spacecraft LYNX MARK-II. Thus, now space travel has become a reality to us. But it is also reality that there's no study by legal basis preparing for the space tourism domestically and internationally. In this regards, this thesis dealt with legal issues related to space tourism. These are as follows : (1) the applicabe law issue that is which law between air law and space law will apply, (2) the status of space tourist issue that is space tourist can be considered as personnel of a spacecraft and/or space flight participant and has the duty to obey the order of the captain of spacecraft, (3) the responsibility of the government for the non-governmental entities such as private enterprise which involved in space tourism in case space accident occurs during the space travel, (4) license permit and supervision issue by the government (In this point, for activating the market of the space tourism, I think it is essential to guarantee the safety of the spacecraft by the government authority, though U. S. government declared that it has not certified the launch vehicle as safe for carrying crew or space flight participants), (5) registration issue, (6) space insurance issue. For all the issues mentioned above, I have studied the existing international treaties and several country's domestic law to the space by referring U.S's Commercial Space Launch Amendment Act of 2004 and New IGA of 1998 and concluded that uniform legal regime to govern these issues should be established domestically and internationally in the near future.

• The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy
• /
• v.24 no.1
• /
• pp.153-194
• /
• 2009

The resources of outer space are for the common exploitation of mankind, and it is a common responsibility of mankind to protect the outer space environment. With the rapid development of space science and technology, and especially with the busy space activities of some major space powers, environmental contamination or space debris is steadily increasing in quantity and has brought grave potential threats and actual damage to the outer space environment and human activities in space. Especially We must mitigate and seek out a solution to remove space debris which poses a threat directly to man's exploitation and use of outer space activities in the Low Earth Orbit (LEO) and in the Geostationary Orbit (GEO), through international cooperation and agreement in the fields of space science, economics, politics and law, in order to safeguard the life and property of mankind and protect the earth's environment. While the issue of space debris has been the subject of scientific study and discussion for some time now, it has yet to be fully addressed within the context of an international legal framework. During the earlier stages of the space age, which began in the late 1950s, the focus of international lawmakers and diplomats was the establishment of basic rules which sought to define the legal nature of outer space and set out the parameters for space activities and the nature and scope of activities carried out in outer space were quite limited. Consequently, environmental issues and the risks that might arise from the generation of space debris did not receive priority attention within the context of the development international space law. In recent years, however, the world has seen dramatic advances in technology and increases in the type and number of space-related activities which are being carried out. In addition, the number of actors in this field has exploded from two highly developed States to a vast array of different States, intergovernmental and nongovernmental organizations, including private industry. Therefore, the number of artificial objects in the near-Earth space is continually increasing. As has been previously mentioned, COPUOS was the entity that created the existing five treaties, and five sets of legal Principles, which form the core of space law, and COPUOS is clearly the most appropriate entity to oversee the creation of this regulatory body for the outer space environmental problem. This idea has been proposed by various States and also at the ILA Conference in Buenos Aires. The ILA Conference in Buenos Aires produced an extensive proposal for such a regulatory regime, dealing with space debris issues in legal terms This article seeks to discuss the status of international law as it relates to outer space environmental problem and space debris and indicate a course of action which might be taken by the international community to develop a legal framework which can adequately cope with the complexity of issues that have recently been recognized. In Section Ⅱ,Ⅲ and IV of this article discuss the current status of international space law, and the extent to which some of the issues raised by earth and space environment are accounted for within the existing United Nations multilateral treaties. Section V and VI discuss the scope and nature of space debris issues as they emerged from the recent multi-year study carried out by the ILA, Scientific and Technical Subcommittee, Legal Subcommittee of the United Nations Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space ("COPUOS") as a prelude to the matters that will require the attention of international lawmakers in the future. Finally, analyzes the difficulties inherent in the future regulation and control of space debris and the activities to protect the earth's environment. and indicates a possible course of action which could well provide, at the least, a partial solution to this complex challenge.

• The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy
• /
• v.28 no.2
• /
• pp.223-258
• /
• 2013

1967 Outer Space Treaty(Treaty on Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and Use of Outer Space, including the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies; OST) is a treaty that forms the basis of international space law. OST is based on the 1963 Declaration of Legal Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and Use of Outer Space announced by UNGA resolution. As of May 2013, 102 countries are states parties to OST, while another 27 have signed the treaty but have not completed ratification. OST explicitly claimed that the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies are the province of all mankind. Art. II of OST states that "outer space, including the Moon and other celestial bodies, is not subject to national appropriation by claim of sovereignty, by means of use or occupation, or by any other means", thereby establishing res extra commercium in outer space like high seas. However 1979 Moon Agreement stipulates that "the moon and its natural resources are the Common Heritage of Mankind(CHM)." Because of the number of the parties to the Moon Agreement(13 parties) it does not affect OST. OST also established its specific treaties as a complementary means such as 1968 Rescue Agreement, 1972 Liability Convention, 1975 Registration Convention. OST bars states party to the treaty from placing nuclear weapons or any other weapons of mass destruction in orbit of Earth, installing them on the Moon or any other celestial body, or to otherwise station them in outer space. It exclusively limits the use of the Moon and other celestial bodies to peaceful purposes and expressly prohibits their use for testing weapons of any kind, conducting military maneuvers, or establishing military bases, installations, and fortifications. However OST does not prohibit the placement of conventional weapons in orbit. China and Russia submitted Draft Treaty on the Prevention of the Placement of Weapon in Outer Space and of the Threat or Use of Force against Outer Space Objects(PPWT) on the Conference on Disarmament in 2008. USA disregarded PPWT on the ground that there are no arms race in outer space. OST does not have some articles in relation to current problems such as space debris, mechanisms of the settlement of dispute arising from state activities in outer space in specific way. COPUOS established "UN Space Debris Mitigation Guidelines" based on "IADC Space Debris Mitigation Guidelines" and ILA proposed "International Instrument on the Protection of the Environment from Damage Caused by Space Debris" for space debris problems and Permanent Court of Arbitration(PCA) established "Optional Rules for Arbitration of Disputes Relating to Outer Space Activities" and ILA proposed "1998 Taipei Draft Convention on the Settlement of Space Law Dispute" for the settlement of dispute problems. Although OST has shortcomings in some articles, it is very meaningful in international law in considering the establishment of basic principles governing the activities of States in the exploration and use of outer space, including the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies. OST established the principles governing the activities of states in the exploration and use of outer space as customary law and jus cogens in international law as follows; the exploration and use of outer space shall be carried out for the benefit and in the interests of all countries and shall be the province of all mankind; outer space shall be free for exploration and use by all States; outer space is not subject to national appropriation by claim of sovereignty, by means of use or occupation, or by any other means. The principles of global public interest in outer space imposes international obligations erga omnes applicable to all States. This principles find significant support in legal norms dealing with following points: space activities as the "province of all mankind"; obligation to cooperate; astronauts as envoys of mankind; avoidance of harmful contamination; space activities by States, private entities and intergovernmental organisations; absolute liability for damage cauesd by certain space objects; prohibition of weapons in space and militarization of the celestial bodies; duty of openness and transparency; universal application of the international space regime.