• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제23권
• /
• pp.93-127
• /
• 2004

A contract is made when both parties have reached agreement, or they are deemed to have. After contract the law recognizes rights and obligations arising from the agreement. In order to discover whether agreement was reached between these two parties, we have to analyse the process of negotiation. Recently The People's Republic of China legislated a New Contract Law, which has come into effect since 1st of October 1999. This Law adapts the rules of United Nations(Vienna) Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods and the Unidroit Principles for International Commercial Contracts. And this law is now widely enforced to commercial transactions between individuals, enterprises or other economic organizations of the People's Republic of China and foreign enterprises. Therefore, the foreigner who wish to make a sales contract with Chinese should understand the rules of New Contract Law of China. According to this New Law only a contract which contain offer and acceptance is valid and binding, and it is also pointed out that terms of contact must be certain. Though an oral contract is usually equivalent to a written one, in a case of commercial transactions written contract with signature is desirable. The purpose of this paper is to analyze the new rules of this Law and the new features of their application to commercial transactions in China.

• 무역학회지
• /
• 제42권6호
• /
• pp.1-25
• /
• 2017

본 연구는 하자물품에 대한 매도인의 책임에 관한 CISG와 CESL상 매도인의 계약에 적합한 물품인도의무에 관한 비교연구라는 연구목적 하에 다음과 같은 주요 연구내용을 담고 있다. 첫째, CISG 및 CESL상 하자담보책임 관련 규정중 매도인의 계약에 적합한 물품인도의무의 내용을 구체적 내용의 검토와 더불어 그간 논의의 전개과정을 살펴본다. 둘째, 각 규범의 관련 규정과 상호 비교하여 살펴봄으로 근대입법의 흐름을 진단하여 무역업계의 하자담보책임 관련 이해의 차이를 좁히고 실무적 대응방안의 기초를 마련한다. 셋째, 비교연구를 통하여 상호 차이점에 대한 해석론적 내지 개정 의견을 제시하도록 한다. 이러한 비교연구의 시도는 특히 거래당사자로서 상인과 소비자의 각자 이익의 관점에서 그들의 계약상 합리적 기대를 올바로 반영하고 있는지를 평가하고자 한다.

• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제17권
• /
• pp.37-69
• /
• 2002

This study sumed up general rules for measuring damages based on SGA, UCC, CISG, PICC legislated by on the base of English decision of Hadley v. Baxendale Concluding marks as follows : (1) General rule for measuring damages is a standard rule that is developed to place the aggrieved party in as good a position as if the party in breach performed the contract. (2) Damages may also be accompanied by other remedies (3) Damages has alternative character (4) Damages give the aggrieved party full compensation (5) It is enough for the aggrieved party simply to prove the non-performance for damages (6) Occurence of harm must be reasonably certain and a direct consequence of non-performance (7) while Rule for measuring damages an UCC is concrete CISG is comprehensive. (8) Although rule of UCC and CISG for damages measurement is a similar in many aspect but there are in expression and range of damage between them. (9) the result of this study will give researchers the opportunity to develope in depth and their report of research also contribute chance to perform business their effective oversea's trade

• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제37권
• /
• pp.61-85
• /
• 2008

Bills of lading are crucial in international sales on shipment terms since they guard buyers against loss of or damage to the goods in transit by giving them the rights against carriers. A bill of lading, as document of title, gives the buyer the right to demand physical possession of the goods from the carrier and enables the buyer who is in possession of damaged or short-delivered goods to sue the carrier. In this context the buyer in sales on CIF or CFR terms or FOB terms with additional services benefits from the bill of lading which functions as a receipt of goods and a evidence of the terms of the contract of carriage. Protection of such buyer's interests can be provided in the sale contract through appropriate express or implied terms on the seller's documentary obligations: Which transport document, a bill of lading or a sea waybill, is required? Who should be named as the consignee in the transport document and, in case of bill of lading, by whom should the bill be endorsed? What should be stated in the bill of lading for the quantity of the goods? How about a bill of lading that contains so called "unknown clause"? How many bills of lading for the entire contract goods should be tendered? Can a bill of lading stating that the goods have been shipped in apparent good order and condition also state that the goods were damaged after shipment? This paper seeks to provide answers for these particular questions.

• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제13권
• /
• pp.3-26
• /
• 2000

The International Chamber of Commerce published the millennium edition of its standard trade definitions, Incoterms 2000. Incoterms are a basic reference for sales contracts, in constant daily use throughout the world. The new version will make it easier for traders to do business in the new century, despite the growing volume and complexity of international transactions. Since Incoterms were first published in 1936, they have been updated six times. They precisely define the responsibilities of buyer and seller and are recognized as the international standard by customs authorities and courts in all the main trading nations. It is important for traders to incorporate the correct Incoterms into their international contracts to avoid unnecessary legal problems. Courts may otherwise interpret trade terms according to often widely divergent national laws and unless the use of Incoterms is specified, expensive legal disputes can arise. Division of costs is a most important element in every contract of sale. The parties must know not only who does what but also how costs resulting therefrom should be divided between them. In most cases the fact that a party must do something means that he must also bear the resulting costs, unless otherwise agreed. But there are many exceptions to this principle and uncertainties arise, particularly with respect to services performed by other parties. Also, difficulties arise with respect to the division of costs whenever additional costs are caused by unexpected events, such as hindrances causing a ship to deviate or to remain in a seaport longer than expected. The main principle of the division of costs is clear enough: the seller has to pay costs necessary for the goods to reach the agreed point of delivery, and the buyer has to pay any further costs after that point. But as noted, it is not always easy to implement this principle in practice, since the detailed distribution of functions under the various trade terms is not and cannot be fully defined in Incoterms. Instead, failing precise stipulations in the contract of sale, guidance must be sought from other criteria such as commercial practices used earlier by the same parties or the custom of trade.

• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제12권
• /
• pp.227-252
• /
• 1999

In this Article the writer introduces the origin and preparation of "the UNIDROIT Principles of International Commercial Contracts". In May 1994 the Governing Council of the UNIDROIT gave its formal imprimatur to the UNIDROIT Principles and recommended their widest possible distribution in practice. After brief discussion of the establishment procedure of the UNIDROIT Principles the writer discusses the legal nature of the Principles as an international restatement of contract law. The UNIDROIT Principles has more flexibility than international convention. But it has deficit in the sense of legal stability. Also the scope of application of the Principles was discussed. It can be applied only to the international commercial contracts. It includes two basic principles in it's application, i. e. "commercial contracts" and "international contracts". For the rest of the Article the writer concentrates on the contents of the Principles and the basic ideas underlying the Principles from the point of view of the comparision between the UNIDROIT Principles and "the UN Convention on the International Sale of Goods" (CISG). The UNIDROIT Principles are only restatements and the CISG is an international convention. The application of the CISG is obligatory due to its nature as an international convention. In the contrary the possibility of the application of the UNIDROIT Principles is more flexible. The UNIDROIT Principles is a more comprehensive instrument than CISG. Therefore it can be applied to all kinds of international commercial contracts. In the contrary the CISG can be applied only to international sales contract. Since CISG only deals with contracts for the sale of goods, and the scope of the UNIDROIT Principles is much wider, no overlap can occur where contracts other than sales contracts are concerned. Rather the UNIDROIT Principles can supplement the CISG and the CISG also can be criteria in interpreting the UNIDROIT Principles. As the conclusion the writer summarizes the meanings of the UNIDROIT Principles and presupposed the futur perspectives of the Principles.

• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제63권
• /
• pp.25-62
• /
• 2014

Avoidance refers to the process of terminating a contract because of a non-performance. It implies the right of the aggrieved party to refuse to accept further performance by the other side and to refuse to perform one's own counter-obligations, on a permanent basis. The 1980 U.N. Convention on the International Sale of Goods, hereinafter 'CISG', regulates in Arts. 81-84 the effects of avoidance. The primary effect is that prescribed in Art. 81.1 CISG: both parties are released from their obligations under the contract, subject to any damages which may be due. As seen, the CISG deals with the legal consequences of avoidance, including restitutionary claims. However, a closer look to CISG provisions on restitution reveals that certain matters are left open. For instance, the CISG leaves open questions such as the costs, place and time where restitution is to be made. In this particular, the Convention remains silent as to the consequences of a delayed or refused restitution or the buyer's liability when the goods are damaged or destroyed after the avoidance. In light of the above, the present article attempts to determine the extent to which the modes of restitution are regulated in the CISG and how possible gaps are to be filled.

• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제69권
• /
• pp.673-698
• /
• 2016

This study tries to conduct a systematic analysis on whether adding up the royalties and license fees or not in measuring the taxable amount of tariff. We have confirmed that three main criteria to decide whether it is yes or not are non-inclusion, relatedness and condition of sale. We also have realized that whether satisfying a condition of sale or not depends on license agreement, sales contract, special relationship and so on. Furthermore, we have made case studies of bonded factory, film's domestic distribution, exempt royalty and license fee, price for exclusive use of relevant technology, retroactive application of price change and strict interpretation. Based on the case studies we have derived the following conclusions: First, the royalties and license fees only actually paid to the licensors may be added to taxable amount. Second, the royalties and license fees incurred after the imported goods are made into domestic goods may not be added up. Third, the royalties and license fees paid as a price for use may not be added up. Fourth, the analogical interpretation of relevant codes is not accepted.

• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제28권
• /
• pp.3-36
• /
• 2005

Most legal systems provides the aggrieved buyer with a right to put an end to the contract. Unlike Civil Law systems, the right is rather complicated and uncertain in Common Law systems because they do not sharply distinguish between a refusal which amounts merely to a defence in the nature of the exceptio non adimpleti contractus, and one which is intended to abrogate the aggrieved party's obligations completely and to seek restitution of what he has already performed. That is, they do not draw any sharp distinction between the right of rejection or revocation and the right to put an end to the contract. This explains why the right to put an end to the contract under Civil Law systems are often compared with the right of rejection or revocation under Common Law systems in most academic papers. Having said that, this article describes and analyzes in detail the relevant UCC rules to the buyer's right of rejection and revocation, particularly the rules on the requirements for the right of rejection or revocation. This is for the purpose of providing legal advice to our sellers residing either in U.S.A. or in Korea who plan to enter into U.S.A markets and take academics' interest in the buyer's right which is deemed to be unique compared to the Civil Law systems. In addition, the study attempts to compare the rules as to the right of rejection and revocation under the UCC with those of English law which are stipulated mainly in the Sale of Goods Act (1979) in a statutory form. This may help one better to understand the rules of the UCC which are mostly originated with English law and to find in what way the rules of the UCC depart from those of English law.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제19권1호
• /
• pp.147-169
• /
• 2009

This paper deals with disputes incurred from the CISG provisions in relation with the conformity of goods with a view to finding the general way of approach made by the court and arbitration tribunal in the case laws for the interpretation of CISG based on 6(six) cases thereon. Throughout this study, it has been noted that the German Supreme Court devoted most in creating the general principle of CISG interpretation in relation with national compulsory law of regulation applicable on the conformity of goods. It was New Zealand mussels case in which the German supreme court decided that the exporting country's compulsory law of regulation would be applied in determining the conformity of goods. Furthermore, German supreme court added that CISG does not place an obligation on the exporter to supply goods, which conform to all statutory or other public provisions in force in the import state unless the same provisions exist in the export State as well, or the importer informed the exporter about such provisions existing in the import state, or the exporter had knowledge of the provisions due to special circumstances. It is stipulated in CISG that the goods conform with contract if they are fit for the purpose for which goods of the same description would ordinarily be used. When questions arise concerning matters governed by the CISG that are not expressly defined in the CISG, the question is to be settled in conformity with general principles on which the convention is based. Only when such a general principle cannot be found may the tribunal turn to other sources such as UNIDROIT Principles, Principles of European Contract Law and Lex Mercatoria, etc. Interpretation of CISG should be autonomous, in the sense that it should not depend on principles and concepts derived from any national legal system. Even where a CISG rule is directly inspired by domestic law, the court should not fall back on its domestic law, but interpret the rule by reference to the CISG with a view to its international character and to the need to promote uniformity in its application and the observance of good faith in international trade.