• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.54
• /
• pp.145-166
• /
• 2012

This article examines the limitations of the choice of law caused by Internationally Mandatory Rules in Entering into the Turn-Key Contracts. In June 2007, Clough Engineering, a corporation based in Western Australia, approached the Federal Court of Australia seeking injunctive relief and leave to commence proceedings against an entity located outside Australia, the Oil & Natural Gas Corp of India (ONGC). Clough had contracted with ONGC to provide a range of services in relation to the construction of gas and oil wells off the coast of India. The contract was governed by Indian law, and included a clause by which the parties agreed to submit their disputes to arbitration. Yet the Federal Court assumed jurisdiction over the dispute, principally because Clough had framed its claim as a plea for relief for contraventions of Australia's Trade Practices Act 1974. The result of this cases that it is possible for an arbitral tribunal to hear a claim made under the Trade Practices Act even if that claim arises "in connection with"a contract the proper law of which is not the law of Australia. However, in Transfield Philippines Inc v Pacific Hydro Ltd, the turnkey contract included a choice of law provision, selecting the law of the Philippines, and a clause providing that all disputes arising out of or in connection with the agreement were to be arbitrated under the ICC Rules, with the seat in Singapore. Hearings were in fact conducted in Melbourne, Australia, although all awards were published in Singapore. The result of this cases that it would not be appropriate for an Australian court to adjudicate claims for misrepresentation under Australian statutes dealing with misleading and deceptive conduct, once the arbitral tribunal had determined, applying appropriate choice of law rules, that such claims are governed by the law of the Philippines. To do so would lead to a multiplicity of proceedings, usurp the jurisdiction of the tribunal and deny the intention of the parties as expressed by them in the arbitration agreement. In short, the Internationally Mandatory Rules as an active part of public order create limitation of party autonomy in choice of law rules in a different way. The court is fully entitled to refuse to use those rules of law applicable on the contract which are in the contradiction to the internationally mandatory rules of law of the forum. And the court may give an effect to those Internationally Mandatory Rules that form a part of a law of foreign country when deciding about applicability of certain rules of applicable law.

• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.42
• /
• pp.133-160
• /
• 2009

In International trade the buyer and seller are normally separated from on another not only by distance but also by differences in language and culture. It is rarely possible for the performance of obligations to be simultaneous and the performance of contracts therefore calls for trust in a situation in which the parties are unlikely to feel able to trust each other unless they have a longstanding and successful relationship. Thus the seller under an international contract of sale will not wish to surrender documents of title to goods to the buyer until he has at least an assurance of payment, and no buyer will wish to pay for goods until he has received them. A gap of distrust thus exists which is often bridged by the undertaking of an intermediary known and trusted by both parties who will undertake on his own liability to pay the seller the contract price in return for the documents of title and then pass the documents to the buyer in return for the reimbursement. This is a common explanation of the theory behind the documentary letter of credit in which the undertaking of a bank of international repute serves as a "guarantee" to each party that the other will perform his obligations. The independence principle, also referred to as the "autonomy principle", is at the core of letter of credit or bank guarantee law. This principle provides that the letter of credit or bank guarantee is independent of the underlying contractual commitment - that is, the transaction that the credit is intented to secure - between the applicant and the beneficiary ; the credit is also independent of the relationship between the bank and its customer, the applicant. The most important exception to the independence principle is the doctrine of fraud in the transaction. A strict interpretation of the rule that the guarantee is independent of the underlying transaction would lead to the conclusion that neither fraud nor manifest abuse of rights by the beneficiary would constitute an objection to payment. There is one major problem related to "Independent guarantees", namely abusive or unfair callings. The beneficiary may make an unfair calling under the guarantee. The countermeasure of beneficiary's unfair calling divided three cases. First, advance countermeasure namely by contract. In other words, when the formation of the contract, the parties must insert the Force Majeure Clause, Arbitration Clause to Contract, and clear statement to the condition for demand calling. Second, post countermeasure namely by court. Many countries, including the United States, authorize the courts to grant an order enjoining the issuer from paying or enjoining the beneficiary from receiving payment under the guaranty letter. Third, Export Insurance. For example, the Export Credit Guarantees Department is prepared, subject to certain conditions, to cover the risk of unfair calling. Of course, KEIC in Korea is cover the risk of the all things for guarantees. On international projects, contractor performance is usually guaranteed by either a standby letters of credit or Independent guarantee. These instruments will be care the parties.

• Korean Journal of Social Welfare Studies
• /
• no.39
• /
• pp.83-113
• /
• 2008

The purpose of the study is to explore the mental health social workers' experiences concerning client's self-determination by grounded theory, one of the qualitative method. Although a lot of previous studies has proved that the practitioners have suffered from the ethical considerations in their practice, on which the matter of client's self-determination is centered, little attention is paid to deep exploration of practitioners' real experience about those aspects. To carry out the research question, first, through literature reviews focusing on clarify the underlying issues about client's self-determination, three intrinsic clues are found out; incompetence, medical benefits, the harm to the third party. Data obtained by in-depth interview with 10 participants are analyzed by employing the methode developed by Corbin and Strauss, which could categorize the raw data into several high-level concepts and constructs. The findings of the study show that most practitioners would consider the clients as the intrinsic subject of self-determination. Therefore, in practice, they are trying to support the client's self-determination even within the some constraints. In addition, they also experience the clients' latent potential in actualizing autonomy and self-determination, and identifies the positive effect of self-determination not only on the client's self-help and mental health but also on the practitioners themselves. The results of the study clearly suggests that it is critical to provide the practitioners with adequate ethical education and training to help them to overcome their ethical suffering concerning clients self-determination.

• Korean Journal of Comparative Education
• /
• v.26 no.3
• /
• pp.103-132
• /
• 2016

This study aims to suggest ways of improving the quality of confirmation hearings for the Secretary of Education in South Korea by: 1) comparing the confirmation process by the presidents in South Korea and the United States; and 2) contrasting procedures and contents of hearings for Education Secretary nominee in South Korea and the United States. As the process of selecting a nominee to be the Secretary of Education started, the Blue House Office of Secretary conducted an investigation on the nominee's personal details, family matters, and etc within a week. The investigation, with very limited time frame, led the selection process to be a mere verification on the nominee's morality. On the other hand, the White House Office of Presidential Personnel carried out a thorough investigation on the nominee collectively with the White House Council, Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), and Internal Revenue Service, taking from two to three months. In terms of contents of the hearings, the members of the ruling party mainly asked the nominee for clarification, and his ideas on certain policies, whereas the opposition party focused mostly on verifying his morality. In addition, the committee members led the hearing whilst strongly expressing their own political ideologies. However, in the case of the hearings in the United States, the committee members did not ask any questions to verify the nominee's morality but questions that could help them to get an understanding of the nominee's experience, professionalism, and perspective on nation- wide issues regarding education and federal education policy. As for the procedural characteristics of South Korean hearings, the Committee on Education conducted the hearing with a week of advanced preparation. However, submission of required reports by the nominee, performing confirmation hearings, and reports on the hearing were not mandatory in order to appoint the nominee as the Secretary of Education. On the contrary, in the United States, the members of the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pension spent about a month preparing for the confirmation hearing. For the nominee to be appointed, submission of reports and the committee's approval on the President's nomination were required. Based on the results, this research suggests that it is important to develop a policy that can strengthen the substantiality of the nomination process, to establish a professional agency for personnel investigation, to make a mandatory submission of personal reports before hearings, to extend the time frame for hearing preparation, to secure enough time slot for nominees to respond, and to increase the member's autonomy.

• Journal of the Daesoon Academy of Sciences
• /
• v.43
• /
• pp.67-102
• /
• 2022

The purpose of this study is to analyze the human rights found in the North Korean Constitution and their core problem by focusing on elements of human rights suggested by Daesoon Jinrihoe's doctrine of Haewon-sangsaeng (解冤相生 the Resolution of Grievances for Mutual Beneficence). Haewon-sangsaeng is seemingly the only natural law that could resolve human resentment lingering from the Mutual Contention of the Former World while leading humans work for the betterment of one another. Haewon-sangsaeng, as a natural law, includes the right to life, the right to autonomous decision-making, and duty to act according to human dignity (physical freedom, the freedom of conscience, freedom of religion, freedom of speech, freedom of press, etc.), the right to equal treatment in one's social environment, and the right to ensure the highest level of health through treatment. The North Korean Constitution does not have a character as an institutional device to guarantee natural human rights, the fundamental principle of the Constitution, and stipulates the right of revolutionary warriors to defend dictators and dictatorships. The right to life is specified so that an individual's life belongs to the life of the group according to their socio-political theory of life. Rights to freedom are stipulated to prioritize group interests over individual interests in accordance with the principle of collectivism. The right to equality and the right to health justify discrimination through class discrimination. The right to life provided to North Koreans is not guaranteed due to the death penalty system found within the North Korean Criminal Code and the Criminal Code Supplementary Provisions. The North Korean regime deprives North Koreans of their right to die with dignity through public executions. The North Korean regime places due process under the direction of the Korea Worker's Party, recognizes religion as superstition or opium, and the Korea Worker's Party acknowledge the freedoms of bodily autonomy, religion, media, or press. North Koreans are classified according to their status, and their rights to equality are not guaranteed because they are forced to live a pre-modern lifestyle according to the patriarchal order. In addition, health rights are not guaranteed due biased availability selection and accessibility in the medical field as well as the frequent shortages of free treatments.

• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.20
• /
• pp.23-62
• /
• 2003

The Law amending the Conflict of Laws Act of the Republic of Korea ("Korea"), which had taken two years to prepare, was promulgated on April 7, 2001 and finally took effect as of July 1, 2001. Accordingly, the old earlier Conflict of Laws Act which was called "Seoboesabeop" in Korean ("Prior Act"Old Act) was replaced by the new Conflict of Laws Act called "Gukjesabeop" in Korean ("New Act"). In fact the Old Act Prior Act was promulgated in 1962, but it was regarded as outdated from the moment of its promulgation. However, since the Old Act because it was modeled after the chapter of the Private International Law of the Einfuehrungsgesetz zum Buergerlichen Gesetzbuch (EGBGB) of the Federal Republic of Germany ("German PIL") and the Japanese Private International Law ("Japanese PIL") which had been promulgated toward the end of the 19th century., the Old Act was viewed as outdated from the moment of its promulgation. As a result of the drastic change of the environment for international trade of which that has taken took place in parallel with the global information technology revolution on a global basis, the scope of issues to be addressed which should be resolved by the conflict of laws principles has been remarkably expanded, and various new issues of an entirely which are quite new in its type and nature have arisen been raised. In the field of conflict of laws in its narrow sense, a revolution or crisis of the traditional conflict of laws has been brought about by the advent in the United States rise of a the new methodology for of the conflict of laws, of the United States of America and in the process of overcoming the such crisis the conflict of laws of the European continent has undergone substantial changes such as the diversification of the connecting principles, the expansion of the principle of party autonomy and the consideration of the value of the substantive law to protect socio-economically weaker parties of. The Prior Act, which was based on However, with the mechanical connecting principles and contained various outdated the inappropriate provisions, the Old Act could not cope with the issues raised by the internationalization and globalization of the Korean society. Furthermore In addition, the Old Act Prior Act was regarded as insufficient in that it lacked rules on international jurisdiction to adjudicate, or international adjudicatory jurisdiction, whereas the expectation of the public was that the Conflict of Laws a Act should function as the "Basic Law of the International Legal Relationships"encompassing rules on international jurisdiction given the increase of international disputes. Furthermore the private international law has also attracted more attention from the Korean At the beginning of the new Millennium, thanks to the promulgation of the New Act, I believe that Korea has succeeded in achieving the modest goal of reflecting in the its codification substantial parts of the major developments of the private international law which the leading advanced continental European countries had achieved during the last century. The New Act has followed the approach of the traditional conflict of laws of the European continent. It is a product of the efforts to eliminate the then existing problems of the Prior Old Act and to adapt the Korean private international law regime to the standard of international conventions and national laws of advanced countries. Unlike the Prior Old Act which was heavily dependent upon the prior Japanese PIL and the prior German PIL, the New Act has been prepared by taking into full account the Rome Convention, the Swiss PIL, the new German PIL which took effect in 1986 and various conventions adopted by the Hague Conference. Therefore, the New Act has substantially reduced dependence upon the Japanese PIL and the German PIL, and has gained relatively greater universal validity. The fact that the New Act expressly declares that the determination of international jurisdiction is a matter of conflict of laws is a clear sign that it has departed from the German tradition which confines the conflict of laws principles to choice of laws rules, and moved toward a broader and more practical approach widely accepted in the area of conflict of laws. It is hoped, and I am personally confident, that the New Act will be able to achieve its intended objectives in the 21st century as the basic law for the ever-increasing legal relationships with a foreign element.

• Journal of Legislation Research
• /
• no.44
• /
• pp.487-538
• /
• 2013

It is the most critical issue in recent international intellectual property licence disputes to decide the applicable laws to the license contracts. As Korea and the European Union(EU) reached free trade agreement(FTA), and the EU-Korea FTA entered into force on July 1, 2011, the FTA has boosted social, economic, cultural exchanges between the two. As a result of the increased transactions in those sectors, legal disputes are also expected to grow. This situation calls for extensive research and understanding of the choice of law principles applicable to international intellectual property license contracts in the EU. To decide the laws applicable to issues arising from international intellectual property license contracts disputes, the characterization of those issues is necessary for the purpose of applying private international law principles to them. In terms of characterization, intellectual property license contracts fall within contractual matters. In the EU, the primary rule of choice of law principles in contractual obligations is the Rome I Regulation. Because the choice of law rules, such as private international law principles, the Rome Convention(1980), and the Rome I Regulation, differ in the time of application, it is essential to clarify the time factor of related contracts. For example, the Rome I Regulation applies to contracts which were concluded as from December 17, 2009. Although party autonomy in international contracts disputes is generally allowed, if there is no choice of law agreement between the parties to the contracts, the objective test rule of private international law doctrine could be the best option. Following this doctrine, the Rome I Regulation Article 4, Paragraph 1 provides the governing law rules based on the types of contracts, but there is no room for intellectual property license contracts. After all, as the rule for governing law of those contracts, the Rome I Regulation Article 4, Paragraph 2 should be applied and if there are countries which are more closely connected to the contracts under the Rome I Regulation Article 4, Paragraph 3, the laws of those countries become the governing laws of the contracts. Nevertheless, if it is not possible to decide the applicable laws to the license contracts, the Rome I Regulation Article 4, Paragraph 4 should be applied in the last resort and the laws of the countries which are the most closely connected to the contracts govern the license contracts. Therefore, this research on the laws applicable to intellectual property license contracts under the Rome I Regulation suggests more systematic and effective solutions for future disputes in which Korea and the EU countries play the significant role as the connecting factors in the conflict of laws rules. Moreover, it helps to establish comprehensive and theoretical understanding of applying the Korean Private International Law to multifarious choice-of-law cases.

• The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy
• /
• v.33 no.2
• /
• pp.267-290
• /
• 2018

This paper reviews and criticizes the EU Case of C-452/13, Germanwings GmbH v. Ronny Henning. Under this case, Ronny Henning later sued Lufthansa's budget carrier Germanwings after it refused to pay him 250 euros compensation for a delay he said totalled more than three hours. Germanwings, however, maintained his flight had arrived only two hours and 58 minutes behind schedule. In those circumstances, the following question to the European Court of Justice (ECJ) for a preliminary ruling: What time is relevant for the term time of arrival used in Articles 2, 5 and 7 of Regulation [No 261/2004]: (a) the time that the aircraft lands on the runway (touchdown); (b) the time that the aircraft reaches its parking position and the parking brakes are engaged or the chocks have been applied (in-block time); (c) the time that the aircraft door is opened; (d) a time defined by the parties in the context of party autonomy? ECJ says that the situation of passengers on a flight does not change substantially when their aircraft touches down on the runway at the destination airport, when that aircraft reaches its parking position and the parking brakes are engaged or when the chocks are applied, as the passengers continue to be subject, in the enclosed space in which they are sitting, to various constraints. Therefore, it is only when the passengers are permitted to leave the aircraft and the order is given to that effect to open the doors of the aircraft that the passengers may in principle resume their normal activities without being subject to those constraints. ECJ rules that it is apparent that Articles 2, 5 and 7 of Regulation No 261/2004 must be interpreted as meaning that the concept of 'arrival time', which is used to determine the length of the delay to which passengers on a flight have been subject, corresponds to the time at which at least one of the doors of the aircraft is opened, the assumption being that, at that moment, the passengers are permitted to leave the aircraft.