• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.10
• /
• pp.7-20
• /
• 1997

• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.10
• /
• pp.65-81
• /
• 1997

• Strategy21
• /
• s.38
• /
• pp.163-192
• /
• 2015

This study is intended for the Maritime Boundaries(Baseline) of the Unified Korea. According to the international law, North-Korea is recognized as a nation. Then with unification, the state succession will be a very important issue. Thus we should seek for the expected problems and counter-measures, by analyzing of the State-succession. There is a conflict of the positive or negative reaction about the state succession. However, in general, 'the principle of continuity' has been applied for at the national border treaty, regardless of the type of State succession. This can be found on Article 11 & 12 of the 「1978 Vienna Convention on Succession of States in Respect of Treaties」, Article 62, paragraph 2 of the 「1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties」, and a series of international case law. Currently it is being understood as customary international law. In summary, although South and North Korea, China, Russia and Japan are not the parties of 「1978 Vienna Convention」, the unified Korea will necessarily have a duty to succeed national boundaries(also, maritime baseline) of North Korea. Specifically, we have an objective and rigorous review of the treaty of maritime baseline that is signed between North Korea and neighboring countries, such as 「National Border Treaty Regime between North Korea and China」 and 「Treaty between the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics and the Democratic people's Republic of Korea on the Demarcation of the Soviet-Korea National Border」. Also, we analyzed 'Historical Bays' and 'Straight Baseline' system. By this, we are able to occupy a favorable position when renegotiating with neighboring countries, at the point of unification.

• Journal of Korea Trade
• /
• v.27 no.3
• /
• pp.43-64
• /
• 2023

Purpose - This paper studies whether CISG can be a suitable governing law for pure service contracts. When CISG was first drafted, there was little disagreement on the fact that contracts for the sale of goods and those for the provision of services were two different types of contract. Based on this understanding, CISG explicitly provides that the Convention will apply to contracts where the preponderant part of the contractual obligation is on the sale of goods, not services. However, as more sales transactions have come to include more elements of services, mainly due to the advancement of the IoT industry, the distinction between goods and services became more blurred. Based on the observation of recent changes, some scholars even argue that such a change supports the applicability and suitability of CISG to even pure service contracts. The purpose of this paper is to critically analyze and evaluate their argument. Design/methodology - This paper focuses on two separate but related issues: CISG's 'applicability' and 'suitability' to service contracts. For the first issue, this paper will examine the rules of interpretation of international treaties under the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties of 1969, and will apply its rules to find the proper answer. For the second issue, this paper will perform logical and empirical analyses on the reasoning employed by scholars claiming the suitability of CISG to service contracts. Findings - This paper concludes that CISG does not, and should not, apply to pure service contracts. The argument that CISG applies to pure service contracts directly contravenes Article 3(2) of the Convention, which expressly states that it does not apply to a contract wherein the preponderant part of its obligation is about services rather than sales. Similarly, CISG is not a suitable governing law for pure service contracts because it aims provide rules specifically tailored to the needs of transactions of sales of goods, not services. Servitization of sales of goods transaction does not change this conclusion. Originality/value - This paper presents different views from those offered by some eminent scholars on the issue of applicability and suitability of CISG to service contracts. By doing so, it is hoped that the confusion caused in discussions so far are clarified. Hopefully, this paper can also provide practical guidance to practitioners engaged in the fields of international sales, services, and IoT industries.

• Proceedings of KOSOMES biannual meeting
• /
• 2017.11a
• /
• pp.202-202
• /
• 2017

• The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy
• /
• v.16
• /
• pp.160-196
• /
• 2002

In this thesis. I have first introduced and studied Chubb & Son. Inc. v. Asiana Airlines. 214 F.3d 301 (2nd Cir. 2000). which held that at the time that the dispute in this case arose. there was no treaty relationship between the United States and South Korea under the Original Warsaw convention. the Hague Protocol. or a treaty consisting of those provisions of the Original Convention that were not amended by the Protocol. And I have analyzed U.S. government s position that was expressed in Brief for the United States as Amicus Curiae on petition for a writ certiorari to the 2nd Circuit on Chubb & Son case and 2nd Circuit s Fujitsu Limited v. Federal Express Corporation. 247 F.3d 423 (2001) which was held in a related question afterwards but was somewhat inconsistent with Chubb & Son s holding. Furthermore. I also examined U.S. government s measures which have been considered and taken to cope with consequences of Chubb & Son case's ruling. Lastly. I have examined several effects which Chubb & Son s ruling would give our nation s airlines and suggested our government's countermeasures.

• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.23
• /
• pp.223-247
• /
• 2004

United Nations Commission on International Trade Law(hereinafter"UNCITRAL"), the core legal body of the United Nations system in the field of international trade law, is currently in the process of preparing a draft instrument on the international carriage of goods. In order to facilitate and prompt for new draft instrument, Working Group Ⅲ was established under the auspicious of UNCITRAL in 2002. Working Group, which was composed of all member countries of UNCITRAL, considered the text of preliminary draft instrument on the carriage of goods by sea. According to the Working Group's report, this new convention deals with issues relating to the international ocean carriage of goods such as the scope of application, the period of responsibility of the carrier, liability of the carrier, obligations of the shipper and transport documents including electronic records. In the course of the second reading, however, there are lots of outstanding issues to deliberate and consider for formulating new version of the ocean cargo liability convention. One of the substantial issues is the snail's pace of progress in last sessions. Therefore legal adviser and industry representatives assume the next UNCITRAL meeting, in Vienna, Nov. 29-Dec. 10, would be more critical to complete the convention.

• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.59
• /
• pp.59-78
• /
• 2013

The interpretation and application of investment treaties takes place mostly by ad hoc tribunals. Their composition varies from case to case. But in interpreting and applying investment treaties are bound to exist on a ground rule and coherent criteria. Given summarizing contents of this study, those are as follows. When interpreting investment treaties, (i) most tribunals is based on Article 31 and 32 of the VCLT, (ii) tribunals rely on previous decisions, (iii) tribunals resort to travaux pr$\acute{e}$paratoires, (iv) tribunals consider the interpretative statement. When applying investment treaties, (i) treaties apply only in relation to acts or events that occurred after their entry into force, (ii) tribunals have applied different inter-temporal rules to jurisdictional clauses and substantive provisions in treaties, (iii) the relevant date for purposes of jurisdiction is the date of the institution of proceedings, (iv) Under the ICSID convention, the host state and investor's nationality must be a party to the convention on the date the proceedings are instituted. This study is expected to possibly become guideline in the interpretation and application standards of investment treaties. So future disputes can be prevented and prepared in advance.

• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.12
• /
• pp.615-641
• /
• 1999

Trade and the environment emerged as a major and complex issue for trade negotiators in the final stages of the Uruguay Round negotiations. The agreements and other international measures employing trade measures and trade sanctions for achieving global environmental objectives are Vienna Convention on the Protection of the Ozone Layer(1985), the Montreal Protocol on Substances that deplete the Ozone Layer(1987), The Framework Convention on Climate Change(1992), the Convention on Biological Diversity(1992), the Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movement of Hazardous Waste and their Disposal(1992), the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Faunna and Flora(1975), the Rio Declaration, the Agenda 21, etc. The texts of the World Trade Organization(WTO) incorporated certain provisions which were designed to reflect some of the environmental concerns are Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Properity Rights(TRIPs), Trade-Related Investment Measures (TRIMs), the General Agreement on Trade in Services(GATS), and Technical Barriers to Trade(TBT) There is the possibility of conflict between multilateral environmental agreements and WTO agreements granting waivers against trade measures and sanctions. This remains a possibility, especially between countries which are Member of WTO and which are not Members of the relevant multilateral environment agreements, and countries which are Members of both the WTO and the relevant MEAs. Measures taken under the trade-related provisions of MEAs could potentially give rise to conflicts under obligations arising in WTO texts. If the parties in dispute are WTO members while they are not members of MEAs, the WTO provisions can be granted a certain priority in terms of international norms and vice versa. When the parties concerned are both WTO members and MEAs, it will be rational to grant the WTO provisions a priority. However, such measures should neither constitute a means of arbitrary or unjustifiable discrimination between countries where similar conditions prevail, nor create a disguised restriction on trade. Also any trade measures taken should be necessary to prevent developments in trade from endangering the effectiveness of an MEA and they should be proportional and least trade restrictive.

• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.14
• /
• pp.349-370
• /
• 2000

The environmental problems such as global climate change, global waming, ozone depletion, environmental pollution have been caused by the rapid economic growth, increasing in use of fossil fuels for industrialization and scientific technology development. Especially human activities are significantly altering the atomosphere's composition and its radiative properties. To Stabilize greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere at a level that would prevent dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system, the international community adopted the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change in 1992 and Kyoto protocol in 1997. Also to protect ozone layer the international community adopted the Vienna Convention for the Protection of the Ozone Layer in 1985, and the Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer in 1987. To achieve global environmental objectives, some multilateral environmental agreements includes trade regulation. For example, Montreal Protocol includes the provisions to regulate the world trade of the sudstances which might destroy ozone layer. However Kyoto Protocol has no provisions to regulate trade and is not in force yet. Although there is no trade regulation article in Kyoto Protocol, the international world trade will be influenced by limitation and reduction of CO2 and strengthening the CO2 emission standard for import good. For example Korean car industy agreed with EU to reduce CO2 emission from new passenger car and Korean Semiconductor industry agreed with WSC(World Semiconductor Council) to reduce PFCs in 1999.