• 한국조사연구학회지:조사연구
• /
• 제11권3호
• /
• pp.57-79
• /
• 2010

본 연구는 정책평가방법에 따라 표시 광고규제의 정책성과에 대한 평가결과를 비교분석하였다. 이를 위해 우리나라 표시 광고규제의 주요정책인 중요정보고시제도, 표시광고실증제도, 임시중지명령제도, 정정광고제도를 평가대상으로 선정하였다. 그리고 소비자 관점의 전문가와 기업의 표시 광고업무 실무자, 공정거래위원회에서 소비자정책을 담당하는 전 현직 공무원 등 총 76명을 직접 방문하여 구조화된 설문지와 병행하여 면접법으로 자료를 수집하였다. 본 연구의 결과 정책성과에 대한 평가방법에 따라 기업의 표시 광고업무 실무자들과 정책담당자들의 정책별 평가순위에 소폭의 변동이 있었으며, 기존의 일반적인 단순평가 결과는 '문항의 중요도'를 반영한 가중평가와 '판단에 대한 확신성'을 고려한 퍼지평가에 비해 상향된 평가점수가 산출되었다. 이는 정책성과 평가에 있어 어떠한 평가방법을 사용하는가에 따라 평가결과가 다르게 나타날 수 있음을 시사한다.

• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제13권
• /
• pp.131-149
• /
• 2000

In connection with international commercial arbitration the need to seek interim relief is generally recognized. Interim reliefs address the requirements of a party for immediate and temporary protection of rights or property pending a decision on the merits by the arbitral tribunal. The most common forms of interim relief are attachments and injunctions. If the arbitral tribunal has not yet been appointed, an application for interim relief must usually be addressed to the local courts at the place of commercial arbitration. If the arbitral tribunal has been appointed, the application for interim relief is first made to the arbitral tribunal. Interim relief by the arbitral tribunal is in the form of a direction to the parties. Since the arbitral tribunal has no enforcement power, it may be necessary to have a arbitral tribunal's direction confirmed by a local court which can enforce its order. The New York Convention does not provide for interim reliefs. The question is whether Article II(3) of the New York Convention that the court "shall, at the request of one of the parties, refer the parties to arbitration" denies jurisdiction to courts to grant interim reliefs in international commercial arbitration. Some cases have indicated that the U. S. court have no power to grant interim relief. Other cases have indicated that the U. S. courts do have the power to grant interim relief. It is unlikely that a U. S. court will order interim relief in relation to an commercial arbitration in a foreign country. Article 26 of the UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules provides with respect to interim measures of protection. Section 1 of Article 26 of UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules provides that the arbitral tribunal may take any interim measures it deems necessary in respect of the subject matter of the dispute, including measures for the conservation of the goods forming the subject matter in dispute. This article gives the arbitral tribunal the broadest authority, not limited to safeguarding property. Article 17 of the UNCITRAL Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration provides that the arbitral tribunal may order any party to take such interim measure of protection as the arbitral tribunal may consider necessary in respect of the subject matter of the dispute. It may be noted that the article does not deal with enforcement of such measures. The International Chamber of Commerce Rules of Conciliation and Arbitration do not expressly empower the arbitral tribunal to grant interim reliefs. However, Article 8.5 of the ICC Rules of Conciliation and Arbitration provides that the parties shall be at liberty to apply to any competent judicial authority for interim measures. In conclusion, the power of the arbitral tribunal to provide interim reliefs is generally recognized in the arbitration rules of arbitral institutions. However, the arbitral tribunal's authority is limited by its lack of enforcement mechanisms. It is generally recognized that the local courts have power to grant interim reliefs in aid of an commercial arbitration. However, local courts are reluctant to grant interim reliefs if that decision requires an adjudication of issues within the special competence of the arbitral tribunal.