• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제12권2호
• /
• pp.337-372
• /
• 2003

Given the difficulties investors would encounter in pleading and proving their claims in court, they may well be better off in a system where less attention is paid to the law and more to the equities of the actual dispute before the arbitration panel. While this is not a system where accountability and predictability of results can be achieved, investors may fare better than they might expect. It follows then that if equitable considerations enhance rather than subtract from investors' chances of recovery, then investors need not worry about the consequences of the arbitrators' failure to apply the law. This article tracked the evolution of the arbitration process, through amendments to the pertinent securities arbitration codes of procedure, from an informal proceeding into a quasi-judicial one. Subsequently, I examined the practical difficulties arbitrators encounter in their efforts to apply the law. The Court in McMahon assumed arbitrators would apply the law and that the “manifest disregard” standard would provide sufficient judicial oversight to ensure that they did. But there is no meaningful review of arbitration awards to assure arbitrators are applying the law. Arbitration awards have no value as precedent for future arbitrations. Accordingly, there appears to be little reason to write such an award, particularly if the end result is an award immune from challenge no matter how the panel ruled. In these days, securities arbitration as a disputes resolution system is becoming a more popular practice. The trend of the courts in America has been to enforce arbitration agreements. Moreover arbitration helps alleviate some of the burden of a heavy caseload from the judiciary and is a viable method to resolve disputes in a relatively quick and efficient manner. Therefore I think it would be necessary to introduce securities arbitration system to our disputes resolution system Compared to American practices, there could be, of course, many differences in recognition on arbitration and legal structure in our country. Thus it will be an assignment to consider seriously and carefully what kind of securities arbitration system will be proper for us.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제23권1호
• /
• pp.55-84
• /
• 2013

There should be an arbitration agreement between concerned parties in order to resolve a dispute through arbitration. The arbitration procedures, including the selection of the arbitrator and the adjudicative rights of the arbitrator, are based on the arbitration agreement. In other words, the arbitration procedure and adjudication can be carried out within the boundaries of the arbitration agreement. Traditionally, the Doctrine of Separability of the arbitration agreement has been acknowledged in order to emphasize its importance and to clearly separate it from the contract. Today, when the Doctrine of Separability of the arbitration agreement is well established, overemphasizing this separability could hamper its effectiveness and the autonomy of the parties. Moreover, arbitration agreements in the past were required to be written, clarifying the existence of the agreement and determining the scope of its validity. Further, an arbitration agreement was considered as narrowly as possible. However, since arbitration has become a generalized resolution for disputes, the formal or content requirements should be reconsidered. In terms of validity, the subjective and objective scope should necessarily be extended as a means to resolve disputes related to an arbitration agreement and reduce the resolution cost and duration. Under this perspective, the arbitration theory should now focus on arbitration agreements rather than the place of arbitration. We should break from the nationalistic view, which understands that the arbitration system is a part of the national legal system and that arbitration is allowed solely by permission of the nation. Instead, we should extensively reinterpret the subject of arbitration agreement and its range of effects so that disputes can be resolved between the concerned parties under a single procedure and norm, a necessary step forward. Moreover, in spite of the positive contribution and role of the New York Convention toward the establishment and development of the international arbitration system, there should be an effort to overcome its deterioration. As mentioned in the recommendations regarding the interpretation of the arbitration agreement in the New York Convention in 2006, we should begin by striving to match the Convention as a means of interpretation with the changes of the twenty-first century. Ultimately, we should meet the demands of the new era through amendments to the Convention.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제28권3호
• /
• pp.35-53
• /
• 2018

The purpose of this paper is to focus on the development of the arbitration system, such as the establishment of the arbitration industry and expanding the scope of arbitration fields. The solution method of arbitration differs greatly from that of the court's trial process. This can be seen in the way of autonomous conflict resolution. Therefore, the role of arbitrator is a very important function. In this sense, it seems necessary to establish a professional arbitrator system. Now the Arbitration Promotion Act has been enacted and interest in the arbitration industry is also rising. It is necessary to deal effectively with new incidents according to changes in the legal environment internationally. In order to do this, it is imperative to train professional arbitrators. A training plan for arbitration manager to assist this is now under consideration. The coming of the Fourth Industrial Revolution and the growth of artificial intelligence (AI) technology will simply stop the uniform way of determining winners by lawsuits. Even in new companies entering new markets as well as overseas companies, assistance from arbitration experts is indispensable in order to effectively deal with international trade disputes that will develop in the future. In addition to fostering the arbitration industry, it is necessary to train experts in domestic and foreign arbitration and arbitration practitioners to provide high-quality legal services. For these human resource development measures, we will explore the subject and procedural methods. The Arbitrators Association should concentrate on these matters and be cautious when focusing on the training of arbitrators and arbitration managers through the selection process. The Arbitrators Association must strengthen the level of new education (designation / consignment). Measures must be taken in order to grant such procedures as well as subsequent steps.

• 한국지역지리학회지
• /
• 제7권4호
• /
• pp.105-119
• /
• 2001

우리나라에서는 연안지역을 이용할 때 다양한 이해주체들간에 의견이 대립되고 있다. 그러나, 선진국과 같이 이해상충 해결을 위한 중재자의 활발한 활동, 이해갈등해소 프로그램의 운영, 정책의 일관성과 지속성 및 연안관련법의 연관성 등이 잘 정비되어 있지 못하여, 연안지역에서 이해상충이 발생될 시 큰 사회적 파장을 가져오고 있다. 이러한 문제를 개선하고자, 본 연구에서는 연안지역을 이용할 때 상충되는 이해주체간에 합리적인 의사결정을 도출 할 수 있도록 객관적이고 정형화된 평가 기준을 제시하는 것을 연구의 목적으로 하였다. 연구의 방법은 시스템의 평가구조를 유효하게 추출하는 주성인 분석법을 사용하며, 설문은 보존과 환경에 관련된 연구소, 환경단체, 지역주민을 포함하는 전문가 집단, 개발 및 이용에 관련된 정부, 지방자치단체, 지역연구소에 소속되는 전문가 집단 및 관련 분야에 연관되는 대학교수, 연구원 등외 연구분야의 전문가집단으로 구성된 전문가 자문단을 대상으로 실시하였다. 연구의 결과 이해상충 조정을 위한 객관적인 평가구조는 총 5개의 대표속성 및 35개의 복합적인 세부속성으로 구성되어 있음을 확인 할 수 있었다. 연구결과 도출된 평가구조는 중재자의 활동 및 합리적인 의사결정을 기대하기 어려운 우리나라 현실에서 상충해소를 위해 큰 역할을 할 것으로 기대되며, 관련분야 및 후속연구에도 큰 도움을 줄 수 있을 것으로 사료된다.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제20권1호
• /
• pp.87-107
• /
• 2010

This paper reviews the distinctive characteristics between e-Trade and e-Commerce in view of commercial arbitration in Korea and explores several improvements for the role of commercial arbitration. As the volume of e-Trade and e-Commerce has expanded day by day, there will be more disputes between traders no matter where the commerce may occur. But despite increasing of the disputes relating to e-Commerce transaction, it seems that the role of commercial arbitration has been shrunk instead. Korea needs to improve the role of commercial arbitration in order to meet and lead the age of u-Trade Hub(u-TH) service and to adopt an offensive or active attitude when arbitration used. Moreover, it is suggested that the competence of arbitration should not only be intensified more precisely but also be redesigned more systematically. Korea should take advantage of arbitration resources actively such as arbitrators as human resource and experiences as knowledge assets and also prepare the policy for sharing those arbitration resources between arbitrators more effectively.

• Strategy21
• /
• 통권40호
• /
• pp.144-161
• /
• 2016

A unanimous Award has been issued on 12 July 2016 by the Arbitral Tribunal constituted under Annex VII to the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea in the arbitration instituted by the Republic of the Philippines against the People's Republic of China. The current security issues in the regional sea shall be carefully reflected to anticipate whether the Award could resolve the existing political conflict or rather will grow military tension in the region. The Award clearly directs the scope of delimiting maritime jurisdiction to coastal States in the Southern China sea, so it seems to help facilitating finding resolutions of regional disputes on maritime boundaries. On the other hand, there are several limitations in reality to implementation of the decisions included in the Award. USA could use the decisions to restrict military activities and exercise of unilateral maritime jurisdiction by China in the region, while China shall encounter guilt to illegitimacy of its activities as well as shaking the legal foundation of its policy in the region. Then the resolution of this dispute through application of international law would rather cause more political confusion. The intension of bringing the case to an international court were to resolve political difficulties. If, however, the political difficulties are not properly reflected in the legal decisions, such decision would possibly raise more political risks.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제17권1호
• /
• pp.77-95
• /
• 2007

This article focuses on the history and evolution of the US court's attitude towards unilateral arbitration and dispute resolution clauses, but also considers the practical approach of national courts to theses clauses. It goes on to consider some potential pitfalls in the operation of unilateral clauses, which should be borne in mind when developing a strategy for bringing or defending a claim which falls within the scope of a unilateral clause. There can be few objections to the general validity of unilateral arbitration clauses. The principle of party autonomy is the driving force behind international arbitration and, provided it is tolerably clear that the parties intended the arbitration clause to operate unilaterally, courts should be reluctant to interfere with the parties' agreement. There are also no persuasive public policy reasons why such clauses should not be upheld in commercial agreements. In addition to the issue of whether such unilateral clauses are permissible under certain law, it is important to be aware of how they should properly operate in practice, that is, useful guidance on the subject of the proper operation and effect of such clauses where they are intended to be used to enable a party to decide whether, and in what circumstances, a claim should be referred to court or to arbitration.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제27권4호
• /
• pp.91-113
• /
• 2017

UN Convention on International Sale of Goods (CISG) and International Commercial Arbitration aim at the promotion and facilitation of international trade. Both of them share similar general principles; i.e., party autonomy and pacta sunt servanda. Also they are often applied concurrently in the case of the international commercial trade. The purpose of this article is to investigate whether the CISG could apply the formation of the arbitration clause that is included in the main contract governed by CISG. Sellers and buyers have freedom of designating choice of law that is applied to their contracts. An international arbitration agreement is presumed to be separable from the contract in which it is found. However, arbitration clauses commonly form part of a general contract. Thus, the CISG is intended to be applied to dispute resolution clauses, including arbitration clause even if it is not completely suitable. Notably, there is a fundamental distinction between the CISG and arbitration. The CISG abolished the formalities of contract. New York convention requires Contracting States' Courts to enforce written international agreements to arbitrate.

• 한국수자원학회:학술대회논문집
• /
• 한국수자원학회 2006년도 학술발표회 논문집
• /
• pp.1352-1356
• /
• 2006

우리나라에서 물과 관련된 분쟁은 민주화와 지방분권화가 가속화됨에 따라 갈등의 주체뿐만 아니라 전개양상까지도 다양하게 변화되고 있다. 최근에는 이 같은 갈등구조가 심화되고, 다양한 형태로 표출됨에 따라 사회불안요인으로까지 확대되고 있어 합리적이고 효율적인 분쟁해결을 지원하기 위한 방법론이 필요한 실정이다. 본 연구에서는 대안적 분쟁해결(ADR, Alternative Dispute Resolution)의 기법 중 하나인 조정(mediation)과정에서의 조정안 도출을 위해 게임이론을 적용하였다. 게임이론에 의한 합리적 해는 제시된 조정안에 객관성을 부여함으로써 의사결정과정의 신뢰성을 향상시킬 것으로 기대된다. 본 연구를 통해 제시한 방법론을 지역 간물 배분과 관련한 가상의 분쟁상황에 적용하였으며, 동적완비정보게임(dynamic complete information game)에서의 교섭게임(bargaining game)으로 구성한 뒤, 경기자(players) 간 배분비율과 배분량을 도출하였고, 이를 편익함수에 의한 양 경기자의 부족편익과 초과편익을 비교하여 그만큼의 편익 차를 보상해주는 조정을 모색하였다. 본 연구는 제3자(third party)에 의한 조정안 제안 시 객관적이고 합리적인 해를 제공하여 이해당사자들이 합의를 이끌어 내는 데 크게 기여할 수 있을 것으로 사료된다.

• 한국주거학회논문집
• /
• 제26권6호
• /
• pp.53-60
• /
• 2015

This study identifies the common problems faced by the owners of strata titles, the Management Corporation, the Joint Management Body, the Commissioner of Building (COB) as well as the Managing Agent being the stakeholders in managing strata properties. The methods employed are qualitative in nature. Analysis is done based on reports published by the relevant authorities dealing with strata residential properties as well as the case law as reported in the two leading journals in Malaysia such as the Malayan Law Journal and the Current Law Journal. The types and nature of problems are derived from the annual reports. The extent of the problems is determined based on the figures and supported by observation and interviews with the COB, being the agency directly involved in overseeing and monitoring strata properties management. The findings show that a substantial number of problems exist in the management of strata properties despite a law that allows the owners to self-managed their own properties. Having stated the status quo concerning the problems, the study also looks at the various means of resolving disputes as exist under the Malaysian housing system. The study proposes that alternative dispute resolution (ADR) modes are more appropriate in ensuring the sustainability of strata living and management.