• Asian Pacific Journal of Cancer Prevention
• /
• v.15 no.24
• /
• pp.10613-10619
• /
• 2015

Background: Both alcohol and aqueous extracts of Sauromatum giganteum(Engl.) Cusimano and Hett, the dried root tuber of which is named Baifuzi in Chinese, have been used for folklore treatment of cancer in Northeast of China. However, little is known about which is most suitable to the cancer therapy. Materials and Methods: Serum pharmacology and MTT assays were adopted to detect the effects of ethanol and aqueous extracts of Sauromatum giganteum(Engl.) Cusimano and Hett, prepared by heat reflux methods, on proliferation of different cancer cells. Results: Cancer cells treated with medium supplemented with 10%, 20%, 40% serum(v/v) containing ethanol extract had a decline in viability, with inhibition rates of 7.69%, 21.8%, 41.9% in MCF-7 cells, 42.8%, 48.1%, 51.8% in SGC-7901 cells, 44.1%, 49.2%, 53.7% in SMMC-7721 cells, 6.8%, 15.2%, 39.8% in HepG2 cells, 7.57%, 16.3%, 36.2% in HeLa cells, 6.24%, 12.5%, 27.4% in A549 cells, and 7.20%, 17.5%, 31.3% in MDA-MB-231 cells, respectively. Viability in the aqueous extract groups was no different with that of controls. Conclusions: An ethanol extract of Sauromatum giganteum(Engl.) Cusimano and Hett inhibited the proliferation of SMMC-7721, SGC-7901 and MCF-7 cells, which supports the use of alcoholic but not aqueous extracts for control of sensive cancers, which might include hepatocarcinoma, gastric cancer and breast cancer.

• International Commerce and Information Review
• /
• v.10 no.3
• /
• pp.143-162
• /
• 2008

The Title 19 of the U.S. Code covers custom duties and is the heart of international trade regulation in the U.S.. Among the provisions in Title 19, is Chapter 4, the Tariff Act of 1930. Under U.S. Antidumping duty law, dumping occurs when `subject merchandise' is imported into the U.S. and sold at less than `fair value.' The administration of U.S. Antidumping duty law is shared between the Department of Commerce('Commerce') and International Trade Commission('USITC'). The U.S. Court of International Trade ("CIT") and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ("CAFC") decided the review of antidumping duty ("AD") determinations and administrative review results issued by the Commerce and the USITC, as well as the review of countervailing duty ("CVD") decisions. In Eurodif S.A. v. United States, the CAFC considered the important issue of whether the antidumping and countervailing duty laws apply to sales and purchases of services--in this case, the sale or purchase of enrichment services. Although the federal courts had considered the issue of whether a sale of enrichment services constitutes a sale of goods, the issue had never arisen in the context of the antidumping and countervailing duty laws. Also this is the first time that the Supreme Court has ever agreed to consider an antidumping case.

• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.36
• /
• pp.29-46
• /
• 2007

The fraud exception rule allows for the issuing bank to dishonor the claim if it the documents and transactions bear fraud though the documents presented are complied with the terms and conditions of the letter of credit. A question arises whether the fraud exception rule can apply to innocent beneficiary when fraud is made by 3rd party. United City Merchants v. Royal Bank of Canada showed a good example how to handle in case of innocent beneficiary. At this case House of Lord found that innocent beneficiary deserves payment applying nullity exception rule. I believe that the nullity exception rule is employed for the benefit of innocent beneficiary as far as the issuer and applicant get no actual damage by the 3rd party's fraudulent action which is shown on documents.

• International Commerce and Information Review
• /
• v.8 no.1
• /
• pp.205-223
• /
• 2006

File sharing through P2P was decided as illegal according to Supreme Court of the U.S. and the Highest Court of Korea in 2005. Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Studios Inc. et al. v. Grokster, LTD., et al. and Soribada v. Korea Association for Music Providers have the same ground for decision. P2P service company has vicarious liability for illegal file sharing of its customers. Balance between copyright protection and development of technology was considered in that decision. Programmer who will develop new program for free download and copyright holders who will exploit every measures to protect their right may compromise for their mutual benefits.

• The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy
• /
• v.19 no.1
• /
• pp.213-233
• /
• 2004

• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.69
• /
• pp.473-493
• /
• 2016

If a certain country or an arbitration institution hopes to keep ahead of the fierce competition in the international arbitration market, it needs to develop hardware factors, such as i) Facility and Infra, ii) Geographical Location, iii) Professional Staff, iv) Global Network, v) Capital, and vi) Arbitrators & Practitioners etc., along with software factors including i) Arbitration Rules of Law, ii) Court's Support, iii) International Convention, iv) Political Risk, and v) Education Environment, which are the most critical requirements in the development strategy for international arbitration. Having perceived the above situation, the Korean government has been working on amending the Korean Arbitration Act to reflect global advanced practice of international arbitration, and seeking to enact laws that will promote our arbitration industry and create a more arbitration-friendly environment. The KCAB is also currently revising both the domestic and international arbitration rules in accordance with these national efforts. Under these circumstances, this paper examines how major leading international arbitration institutions manage their secretariats and suggests how the KCAB can compose and manage its Secretariat to gain a competitive advantage over rival institutions.

• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.14
• /
• pp.153-176
• /
• 2000

The U.K. Bills of Lading Act 1855 had sought to circumvent the problems arising from the doctrine of privity of contracts. Among the principal factors in the introduction of the Act was the exceptional decision of the court in the case of Grant Norway. The Act 1855 was intended to reverse Grant Norway, but has no effect whatever. As it was not properly drafted, there had been a lot of situations where the Act 1855 was not applicable. In those cases, the courts have implied a contract between cosignee and carrier. This is the effect of the common law Brandt v. Liverpool doctrine. With the enactment of the Carriage of Goods by Sea Act 1992, all of the problems shall be resolved. It repeals the Act 1855 and replaces it with provisions covering not only B/L but also sea waybills and ship's delivery orders. According to the new law, title to sue is now vested in the lawful holder of a bill of lading, the consignee identified in a sea waybill or the person entitled to delivery under a ship's delivery order, irrespective of whether or not they are owners of the goods covered by the document.

• Journal of the Korean Mathematical Society
• /
• v.56 no.3
• /
• pp.703-721
• /
• 2019

The notion of slant H-Toeplitz operator $V_{\phi}$ on the Hardy space $H^2$ is introduced and its characterizations are obtained. It has been shown that an operator on the space $H^2$ is a slant H-Toeplitz if and only if its matrix is a slant H-Toeplitz matrix. In addition, the conditions under which slant Toeplitz and slant Hankel operators become slant H-Toeplitz operators are also obtained.

• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.13
• /
• pp.515-536
• /
• 2000

This study analyzes the U.S. case law which challenges the legal conclusions of the district court with respect to the applicability, and effect, of the doctrine of waiver and estoppel in addition to the doctrine of documentary cure. The impliations are as follows. First, the documentary cure requirement can not be interpreted to mean early enough to allow the beneficiary to cure and represent the documents before the presentment deadline or expiry date of letter of credit. The mere fact that the presentment period expired before the completion of bank's review and notification process does not compel any conclusion about whether the examiner spent a reasonable amount of time examining the documents. Indeed, the reasonable time requirement does not imply that banks examine a presentation out of order or hurry a decision based upon particular needs or desires of a beneficiary. Secondly, even if the doctrine of waiver can apply to letter of credit governed by the strict compliance standard, a one-time acceptance of discrepant documents by a bank does not waive the bank's right to insist upon conforming documents in all subsequent letter of credit transactions between the bank and beneficiary. Revised UCC Article 5 is highly persuasive on this point: waiver of discrepancies by issuer or an applicant in one or more presentation does not waive similar discrepancies in a future presentation. Neither the issuer nor the beneficiary can reasonably rely upon honor over past waivers as a basis for concluding that a future defective presentation will justify honor.

• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.13
• /
• pp.365-387
• /
• 2000

One of the central and primary doctrine of the law of marine insurance is that the contract of indemnity entered into by assured and insurer is a contract of the utmost good faith. The notion of utmost good faith is a well established doctrine derived from the celebrated case of Carter v. Boehm(1766), decided long before the inception of the Marine Insurance Act(MIA). With the codification of the law, the principle found expression in sections $17{\sim}20$ of the MIA 1906. In section 17 is presented the general duty to observe the utmost good faith, with the following sections introducing particular aspects of the doctrine, namely, the duty of the assured and brokers to disclose material circumstances, and to avoid making misrepresentations. It is somewhat surprising that section 17, being a long founded doctrine, has not attracted the attention of the courts until very recently. Given that the most significant manifestations of uberrimae fidei are non-disclosure and misrepresentations, fulfillment of the obligation of utmost good faith was, not unreasonably, for a long time perceived in terms of the duty to disclose and not to misrepresent. However, Black King Shipping Corporation v. Massie, 'Litsion Pride'(1985) has clarified that the duty of disclosure stems from the duty of utmost good faith, and not vice versa. The duty of utmost good faith is an independent and overriding duty, with the ensuring sections on disclosure and representations providing mere illustrations of that duty. It is now clear that there are important questions with regard to the general doctrine and as to the nature and scope of any duty of good faith continuing after the contract of insurance is made which require separate and fuller discussion. The purpose of this paper is to review the nature and scope of the duty of utmost good faith.