• 비교문화연구
• /
• 제27권
• /
• pp.31-57
• /
• 2012

The 19th century could not relatively receive attention from local researchers because it was treated as the past cut off from the present as the formative period of modern states of Latin America. According to the characteristics of area studies which focus on changes of politics and society, studies on past affairs could not have been the main focus of attention. But as new liberalism has appeared in Latin America, is throwing the spotlight on liberalism. In addition, the studies on the 19th century have been activated and gradually expanded. And interpretation about the 19th century's history has been variously arranged. Especially, discussion on liberalism and conservatism was established as the key words which can understand and reconsider Latin America in the 19th century. Colombian liberalism which could not overcome heritage of the colonial period in the 19th century and did appear advocating reformation was another form of authoritarianism. Reformation promoted by liberalism was utilized to keep privilege of the ruling class, not to remove the social and economic structure derived from the colonial period. New reformist forces which advocated mercantilism after the middle of the 19th century but they were formed based on the existing system. Colombian Liberal Party was developed as "Another name of conservatization" by reflecting understanding of the conservatives. Colombian liberalists preferred federalism to cut off from repressive characteristics of Spanish colonial rule and secure autonomy of local control through reformation based on economic understanding. Therefore, discussion on the form of government which focused on federalism and centralism acted as the causes of conflict between Colombian liberalism and conservatism. Based on this point, this study tries to analyze liberalism reforms which is the main issue in the Colombian history in the 19th century and consider history of Colombian political conflicts focusing on federalism. The origin of Violencia which is the political violence and Colombian history in the 19th century which has been a series of rebellion can be considered through this procedure.

• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제29권
• /
• pp.39-61
• /
• 2006

The governing law in international commercial arbitration may be divided into governing arbitration law and governing substantive law. The former governs the parties' arbitration agreement and the conduct of any subsequent arbitration. But the later governs the parties' substantive rights and obligations, which means the law that governs contract formation and performance, and the law to be applied by the arbitrator to the merits of the dispute. The purpose of this paper is to examine how to determine the substantive governing law when there is express choice or implied choice between parties. Moreover this author checked any restrictions on party autonomy and also any possibilities to deviate from the governing law. In case of express choice the sources of the law or rules of law might be the national law of one of the parties, the neutral law, the general principles of law or lex mercatoria according to the arbitration law selected by the arbitral tribunal. Some arbitration laws or rules empower the arbitrator to decide the case ex aequo et bono or to act as amiable compositions. If the governing law could be determined expressly or impliedly by the parties, the arbitral tribunal would make a selection. In this case the criteria for selecting a governing law are not exactly same from country to country. But failing any indication by the parties as to governing law, the arbitral tribunal should apply the rules of law, the law or the law under the rule of conflict that the arbitrators consider applicable, according to the governing arbitration law. Among the connecting factors offered by the conflict rules, (which means the factors that the arbitrators consider applicable), some legal systems give precedence to the formation of the contract, other system to the place of performance of the contract, and others to the closest connection or centre of gravity. But the Rome Convention, which unified the conflict rules of the contracting states, gives precedence to the law of the domicile of the party which has to effect the performance which is characteristic of the contract. Finally this author suggested the Choice of Law Clause which covers governing substantive law and governing arbitration law at the same time. Thus the UNIDROIT Principles as well as any national law may be included as a governing law in international arbitration. So when we make sales or service contract, we should take into consideration of the UNIDROIT Principles as a governing law or a supplement to the governing law.

• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제42권
• /
• 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.

• 법제연구
• /
• 제44호
• /
• pp.487-538
• /
• 2013

최근에는 지식재산권의 국제적 이용이 보편화되면서 라이센스 계약 관련 분쟁에 있어 다국적 요소가 개입되는 경우가 많아 실제 분쟁의 해결에 있어서도 준거법의 결정이 가장 첨예한 쟁점이 되고 있다. 특히 2011년 7월 한-EU FTA가 발효됨에 따라 우리나라와 유럽 각국 사이에 경제적 사회적 교류가 활발해지면서 그로 인한 법적 분쟁 또한 증가할 것으로 예상된다. 이러한 상황을 고려할 때 국제적 지식재산권 이용 계약과 관련하여 유럽연합(EU)의 준거법 결정 원칙에 대한 연구가 필요하다. 지식재산권 라이센스 계약과 관련하여 발생하는 국제분쟁에 있어서의 준거법 결정을 위해서는 기본적으로 국제사법 원칙에 의한 유형화가 필요하며 이때 지식재산권 라이센스 계약은 그 성질상 계약의 문제로 유형화된다. 유럽연합(EU)의 경우에는 라이센스 계약상의 쟁점 판단을 위한 준거법 결정을 위하여 기본적으로 로마 I 규정(the Rome I Regulation)의 적용을 검토하여야 한다. 그런데 분쟁의 대상이 되는 계약이 체결된 시점에 따라 국제사법 일반원칙, 로마협약(1980), 로마 I 규정 등 각각의 경우에 적용되는 규범이 달라지므로 계약 체결 시점을 파악하는 것이 가장 우선되어야 하고, 이들 중 로마 I 규정은 2009년 12월 17일부터 체결된 계약에 적용된다. 계약상의 분쟁에 관한 준거법 결정에 있어서는 기본적으로 당사자의 합의에 의한 준거법의 지정이 널리 허용되지만, 당사자의 합의에 의하여 준거법을 결정할 수 없는 경우에는 국제사법 이론상 '객관적 연결 방식'에 의하여 준거법이 결정된다. 이러한 원칙을 반영하여 로마 I 규정 제4조 제1항은 계약의 유형에 따른 준거법 결정 원칙을 제시하고 있지만 지식재산권 라이센스 계약이 해당되는 규정은 없다. 결국 로마 I 규정 제4조 제2항이 검토되어야 하고 로마 I 규정 제4조 제3항에 의하여 해당 계약이 더 밀접한 관련을 가지는 국가가 있는 경우에는 이 국가의 법이 준거법으로 적용된다. 이들 규정에 의하여서도 라이센스 계약의 준거법을 결정할 수 없는 경우에는 최종적으로 로마 I 규정 제4조 제4항에 의하여 해당 계약과 가장 밀접한 관련을 가지는 국가의 법이 준거법으로 결정된다. 이러한 로마 I 규정을 중심으로 지식재산권 라이센스 계약의 준거법 결정 원칙에 대한 연구를 수행함으로써 향후 우리나라와 유럽연합 국가들이 준거법 결정의 연결점으로서 작용할 수 있는 관련 국제계약 분쟁의 해결을 위하여 보다 체계적이고 효과적인 대응책을 마련할 수 있을 것으로 생각되며, 우리나라 국제사법 규정을 적용함에 있어서도 보다 풍부한 이론적 기초를 제공할 수 있을 것으로 기대된다.