• 제목/요약/키워드: Settlement of Dispute

검색결과 201건 처리시간 0.025초

국제상사분쟁해결(國際商事紛爭解決)을 위한 온라인중재(仲裁)에서 정당(正當)한 절차(節次)에 관한 연구(硏究) (A Study on the Due Process in Online Arbitral Proceeding for the International Commercial Disppute Settlement)

  • 유병욱
    • 무역상무연구
    • /
    • 제26권
    • /
    • pp.225-253
    • /
    • 2005
  • Nowadays we does not hesitate to definite answer that the arbitration is the most developed dispute settlement out of court in the international commercial transaction. Online arbitration is desirable for the reasons of speed and cost effectiveness to settle the dispute about the international commercial transaction. Online arbitration is fast because it uses the communication technologies that allow information to be sent fast and efficiently. But in online arbitration too much speed and efficiency may lead to a violation of due process rights and consequently the online arbitration awards run a risk to be set aside or refused its enforcement under the international commercial arbitration mechanism. Speed and efficiency may conflict with the procedural guarantee characterizing each adversary dispute resolution process. As arbitration is exclusive of recourse to courts, a state must guarantee that arbitral proceeding should be satisfied with the claim rights requirement. The main question regarding the sources of regulation is particularly for the due process whether or not this is provided by the availability of grounds to set arbitral award aside. In other words, does it respect due process in the arbitration proceeding including information communication and technology under the online arbitration. In this paper it is discussed about how the main issue in arbitration should be implemented in online arbitration proceedings to cope with the due process requirements in national and international.

  • PDF

개성공단에서의 남북상사중재위원회 구성.운영에 관한 연구 (A Study on the Organization and Operation of the Inter-Korean Commercial Arbitration Committee in Gaeseong Complex)

  • 김광수
    • 한국중재학회지:중재연구
    • /
    • 제24권2호
    • /
    • pp.3-31
    • /
    • 2014
  • As all aspects of international activity have kept growing in good transaction, transnational investments, joint ventures, and the licensing of intellectual property, it is inevitable for disputes to increase across national frontiers. International disputes can be settled by arbitration and ADR. In the situation presented in the paper, any dispute shall be finalized by arbitration and conciliation in the Gaeseong Industrial Complex. Inter-Korean Commercial Arbitration in the Gaeseong Industrial Complex has become the principal method of resolving disputes in trade, commerce, and investment in accordance with the "Agreement on South-North Commercial Dispute Settlement Procedures," "Agreement on Organization and Operation of Inter-Korean Commercial Arbitration Committee," and the Annexed Agreement on "Organization and Operation of Inter-Korean Commercial Arbitration Committee" (2013). But the follow-up measures of the said agreements have not been fulfilled. Some prerequisite measures of the Inter-Korean commercial arbitration must be satisfied. In order to proceed with arbitration and conciliation in the Gaeseong Industrial Complex, we need to ask the following: Does the status of an arbitrational matter? Should an agreement to arbitrate contain a choice of law clause? Should one provide for one arbitrator or three? How should the arbitrators be selected? What is the relation between party-appointed arbitrators and the presiding arbitrator (neutral arbitrator)? Do arbitrators compromise more than the litigation? Can conciliation be combined with arbitration? To execute the enactment of arbitration regulations, the contents of the Arbitration Rules of the Korean Commercial Arbitration Board (South) and the Korea International Trade Arbitration Committee (North), together with the Korean Arbitration Act and External Arbitration Act of North Korea and the UNCITRAL Model Arbitration Law and UNCITRAL l Arbitration Rules are reflected in the Rules. There are many aspects of the Inter-Korean Commercial Arbitration. It is essential to understand key elements; namely, the arbitration agreement, appointment of arbitrator, arbitral proceeding and arbitral award, and enforcement and setting aside of arbitral award. This research deals with five chapters. Chapter 1 provides the introduction. Chapter 2 deals with trade volume between South and North Korea and the kinds of dispute in Gaeseong. Chapter 3 addresses contents and follow-up measures of the agreement on the "South-North Commercial Dispute Settlement Procedures," "Agreement on Organization and Operation of Inter-Korean Commercial Arbitration Committee," and the Annexed Agreement on "Organization and Operation of Inter-Korean Commercial Arbitration Committee" (2013). Chapter 4 features the problems and tasks of the pertinent agreements. Chapter 5 gives the conclusion. Enabling parties to find an amicable solution to the dispute in the Gaeseong Industrial Complex can lead to a useful and appropriate framework either through direct negotiation or by resorting to conciliation or mediation in accordance with pertinent agreements and follow-up measures contained in the agreements.

  • PDF

게임이론을 통한 상사중재의 경제학적 분석: 이론과 사례 (An Economic Analysis of Commercial Arbitration from the Game Theory Perspective: Theoretical Analysis and a Case Study)

  • 김성룡;황석준;황욱
    • 무역학회지
    • /
    • 제43권6호
    • /
    • pp.1-24
    • /
    • 2018
  • 본 연구는 개별기업들이 교역활동과정에서 분쟁이 발생할 경우 국제상사간의 분쟁해결도구로써 중재를 선택하는 이유를 게임이론의 관점에서 구성하였다. 중재에 관한 많은 연구들이 진행되어왔지만 중재를 수요자의 입장에서 살펴본 이론 연구는 드물었다. 본 연구에서 제시된 모형은 기업이 분쟁해결도구를 전략적으로 선택할 수 있다는 전제하에서 중재가 완전베이지언 내쉬균형이 되는 조건을 게임의 대가(payoff)를 비교함으로써 찾아보았다. 이를 통해 알 수 있는 것은 첫째, 중재를 사회의 분쟁해결수단으로 고려할 때 분쟁당사자들의 성향에 대해 고려할 필요가 있다는 점, 둘째 중재를 균형전략으로 만드는 중요한 지표 중의 하나는 중재와 소송의 절대이익이 아닌 두 분쟁해결수단을 통해 기대되는 이익의 상대적인 차이가 중요하다는 점을 보일 수 있었다. 마지막으로 간단한 국제상사의 분쟁사례를 통해 이러한 이론이 어떻게 적용되는지를 살펴보았다.

중재인의 기피에 관한 고찰 (A Study on the Challenge of a Arbitrator)

  • 이명우
    • 한국중재학회지:중재연구
    • /
    • 제13권2호
    • /
    • pp.403-424
    • /
    • 2004
  • In the solutions of civil disputes, there are decision of a court and alternative dispute resolution. Arbitration is one of alternative dispute resolutions. The decision of a court is the compulsory settlement and the solution by citizenship between two opposing parties, but arbitration is the autonomous and voluntary settlement by a private person, that is arbitrator. Besides these points, arbitration has various features in comparison with a decision of a court. The procedure of arbitration is not open to the public and single trial system guarantees speedy solution of disputes In the procedure of arbitration, arbitrator who pass judgement is selected and appointed by the parties to an affair. And there are questions how the arbitrator to become independent from them. Because Arbitration is not agreed solution which based on the concession between opposing two parties but imposed solution which is alike decision of a court. This study illustrates the system of challenge on arbitrator to guarantee independence of arbitrators.

  • PDF

WTO Reform Priorities post-COVID-19

  • Hoekman, Bernard
    • East Asian Economic Review
    • /
    • 제24권4호
    • /
    • pp.337-348
    • /
    • 2020
  • Although the WTO has fulfilled several key tasks it was set up to do - providing periodic reviews of members' trade policies, resolving disputes, supporting negotiations - with the notable exceptions of the Trade Facilitation and Information Technology agreements, WTO members have not been able to negotiate new rules on "bread and butter" trade policies. The importance of doing so was illustrated by the COVID-19 pandemic which saw widespread uncoordinated recourse to trade policy instruments. This paper highlights four reforms that would bolster the effectiveness of the WTO as a forum for trade cooperation: (1) improving collection and reporting of information on trade-related policies; (2) supporting analysis-informed deliberation to establish a common understanding of the need and scope for cooperation in specific policy areas; (3) putting in place a stronger multilateral governance framework for plurilateral cooperation between groups of WTO members; and (4) reestablishing an effective dispute settlement system.

한.중 국제중재제도의 비교와 시사점 (The Comparisons on the International Arbitration Systems between Korea and China)

  • 오원석;이경화
    • 무역상무연구
    • /
    • 제46권
    • /
    • pp.315-350
    • /
    • 2010
  • The rapid growth of Korea-China trade that was since the establishment of diplomatic relations in 1992, led China to surpass the United States and Japan to become Korea's largest trading partner in 2009. "The largest trade" also means "the most disputes", so it is essential to study on dispute settlement and enforcement system of the two. Therefore, in order to make the traders correctly understand and use the arbitration as a dispute settlement method in both China and Korea, this article makes a comparative study on arbitration system between the two countries. And finally, it analyzes the enforcement situation of arbitral award in China, then provides the author's personal recommendations as a countermeasure against the poor enforcement system in China.

  • PDF

중국기업과의 효율적인 분쟁해결방안에 관한 연구 (A Study on the Efficient Ways of Trade Disputes Settlemen Against Chinese Company)

  • 신군재;김경배
    • 한국중재학회지:중재연구
    • /
    • 제13권2호
    • /
    • pp.263-290
    • /
    • 2004
  • Dispute plays a key role in maintaining the desirable performance of trade transaction. Although avoidance of disputes is always a priority, it is also important to prepare methods of dispute resolution which are efficient and economical. So, understanding of chinese dispute resolution system is a necessary requirement for successful business operation with chinese companies. This article analyzed and compared with the ways of trade disputes settlement system such as negotiation, mediation, arbitration and litigation in China in order to help the Korean traders who enter into business with the chinese companies to settle their disputes efficiently. This article suggests that two methods of negotiation and mediation are more likely to be effective than arbitration and litigation to resolve disputes with chinese companies because of problems of enforcement of arbitral award and the uncertainty of China's legal system.

  • PDF

소비자피해구제제도로서 소비자중재에 관한 연구 (Study on the Consumer Arbitration as a Remedy of Consumers' Damage)

  • 김도년;이동하
    • 한국중재학회지:중재연구
    • /
    • 제28권2호
    • /
    • pp.67-89
    • /
    • 2018
  • An arbitration has great strength in the sense that it is a more rapid dispute resolution than a trial, and is means of dispute settlement for an achievement of the purpose which is the improvement of the rights and interests of consumers. Because the remedy of consumers' damage currently has not worked well, discussions about consumer arbitration as a universal Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) is needed. The core of the ADR is not only the professionality and neutrality of an arbitrator and a mediator, but also the non-impairment of the arbitration proceeding's fairness. In addition, it also has both economic feasibility and efficiency. Furthermore, providing an institutional strategy is necessary to ensure fairness in an arbitration award.

서울특별시 개원 치과의사의 의료사고 및 분쟁의 유형과 대책에 관한 연구(2004년) (Study on Types and Counterplans of Medical Accident Experienced by Dentists in Seoul(2004))

  • 윤정아;강진규;안형준;최종훈;김종열
    • Journal of Oral Medicine and Pain
    • /
    • 제30권2호
    • /
    • pp.163-199
    • /
    • 2005
  • 치의학계에서는 의료사고를 일으킬만한 중환자나 응급환자의 빈도가 상대적으로 낮아 의료분쟁에 휘말리는 경우가 적었기 때문에, 이에 대하여 비교적 안전지대로 인식되어 왔다. 그러나 요즈음은 남의 일로 보아 넘기기에는 어려울 정도로 의료분쟁이 증가하고 있다. 이런 연유로 최근에 이르러서는 비교적 다양한 의료사고와 분쟁에 관한 연구가 이루어지고 있으며, 적당한 대처를 위하여 관련된 사항을 분석하고 있으나, 자료가 부족한 실정이다. 본 연구는 2004년 현재 서울시치과의사회 소속 개원치과의사 3684명중, 설문지가 회수된 1882명을 연구대상으로 하며, 치과의사를 대상으로 하는 의료배상책임보험이 시행되고 있는 최근의 개원 치과에서 일어나는 의료사고 및 분쟁의 실태와, 일반적인 치과의사들의 의식을 분석하고, 전체적인 흐름을 파악하여 향후대책의 자료를 제시하는 것을 연구목적으로 한 것으로 다음과 같은 결과를 얻었다. 1. 응답자의 98.47%가 향후 의료사고 및 분쟁 발생에 대한 의구심을 가졌다. 2. 응답자의 27.42%가 의료분쟁을 경험하였으며, 전공의 수련여부와 의료분쟁 경험률 사이에는 유의한 차이가 나타나지 않았다. 3. 의료사고 중 치주.보존 관련 사고가 20.50%로 가장 높았으며, 임프란트 관련사고도 6.17%로 나타났다. 4. 응답자의 43.02%만이 치료 전 충분히 설명을 하였으며, 환자의 정확한 동의없이 치료를 시작하는 경우도 25.90%로 나타났다. 5. 설명 및 동의를 시행하지 않아 의료분쟁이 발생한 것은 16.55%이며, 의무기록 관련자료가 부족하여 문제해결에 어려움을 당한 경우는 10.26%로 나타났다. 6. 응급조치를 시행할 수 있다고 생각하는 경우는 49.73%였으며, 이중 정확한 지식을 갖춘 경우는 23.60%로 나타났다. 7. 의료분쟁 발생시 88.09%가 치과의사에게 조언을 구하였으며, 또한 단체로는 구치과의사회에 주로 자문을 구했다. 8. 의료분쟁과 관련하여 소비자보호원으로부터 자료 제출 요구를 받은 경우는 5.26%로 나타났으며, 이들 중 75.61%는 이에 성실히 대응하였다. 9. 의료분쟁을 해결한 후 83.63%는 비교적 안정적인 심리상태를 회복하였다. 10. 응답자의 99.46%가 의료분쟁처리기구가 필요하다고 느꼈으며, 78.58%는 매우 시급하다고 생각하였다. 11. 66.70%의 치과의사가 의료분쟁 경험이 없이도 의료배상책임보험에 가입하였다. 그러나 응답자의 73.36%는 이 상품에 대하여 잘 몰랐으며, 가입자의 93.36%는 분쟁처리과정을 잘 알지 못했다. 12. 79.00%의 응답자가 의료배상책임보험에 가입한 후에는 의료분쟁이 발생하여도 당황스러우나 가입 이전보다는 비교적 안심할 수 있다고 느끼고 있었다. 13. 의료배상책임보험에 의한 분쟁의 해결시 치과의사는 71.92%가 보통이상으로 만족하였으나, 환자는 35.61%만이 만족하였다. 14. 의료배상책임보험의 보완점으로 53.22%가 분쟁의 신속한 해결을 위해서 보험사, 의사, 환자 모두가 합의 유도에 동참해야 한다고 생각하였으며, 또 29.08%의 응답자가 합의과정에서 환자측의 업무방해를 보험사에서 방어해 주기를 바라고 있었다. 이상의 결과들을 볼 때 증가하는 의료분쟁에 대한 인식을 제고하고 이에 대한 교육 및 해결 장치의 보완이 필요할 것으로 사료된다.