• International Commerce and Information Review
• /
• v.5 no.1
• /
• pp.159-177
• /
• 2003

As many kinds of transactions and informations move onto the Internet, methods to resolve dispute arising from this trend must also move onto the Internet. The Internet has heightened interest in Alternative Dispute Resolution(ADR). Some organizations are using the new technology in the field of dispute resolution, for example, by establishing web sites and offering communications through the Internet. Online ADR provides an attractive solution to an important part of the jurisdictional challenges presented by the Internet. This study reviews the types of online ADR as the dispute settlement way in electronic commerce. Especially this paper points out the task that Korea has to promote the online ADR for more effective and efficient dispute settlements.

• The Journal of the Korea Contents Association
• /
• v.10 no.11
• /
• pp.294-303
• /
• 2010

Unexpected results caused by medical service are defined as malpractice, and the doctor must bear the responsibilities following the medical treatment. Malpractice disputes are disputes between patients, who are seen as the only victim in this way, and medical personnel who do not admit to the charges. Unfortunately, in reality, an official approach to mutual understanding and communication in the instance of such disputes does not exit. Based on this background, this study was attempted to prevent similar forms of medical disputes from occurrence and provide fundamental data to prepare by analyzing the medical disputes precedent. Results of the study are as follows: First, For type of medical institution, hospitals accounted for the most part as 62.9%. Second, Among total medical disputes, the cases surgery accounted for 27.8%, violation of duty care accounted for 20.6% and that of medical treatments 11.3%. Third, For a mean agreed amount by medical department, it was the highest in obstetrics & gynecology as 38,384,000 won. In conclusion, the most desirable method of dispute resolution is to prevent a cause of dispute to the root.

• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.32 no.1
• /
• pp.71-91
• /
• 2022

The legal integration in the European Union that seeks a unified system in consumer disputes and the German Consumer Dispute Mediation Act based on this pursues the procedural fairness of consumer disputes and the equality of results. The role and legal status of the dispute mediator, who plays a very important role in this process, and the stable operation of the dispute resolution system and the guarantee of reasonable results through the guarantee of fairness and independence are very important values. In particular, the dispute mediator under the Act is conceptually different from the existing mediator or mediator, and through this distinction, the duties and contents of the dispute mediator are also distinguished. For this reason, the qualifications of dispute mediators that affect the outcome of dispute mediation are strictly stipulated. There have been some criticisms of this strictness, and such strictness is also seen as an excessive limitation. However, these standards can be understood as one of the efforts to make the dispute mediation procedure more systematic and to operate objectively in accordance with laws and procedures. In addition, in relation to the issue of independence and impartiality of the dispute mediator, the status of the dispute mediator is guaranteed in various aspects. In economic terms, it is not influenced by external factors, and furthermore, in order to guarantee job stability, the results of job security and dispute resolution are not linked. By examining the appropriate level of discipline for these dispute mediators, we expect the developmental growth of the consumer dispute resolution system under our Act.

• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.4 no.1
• /
• pp.1-22
• /
• 1994

• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.15 no.2
• /
• pp.61-91
• /
• 2005

It is well recognized that the availability of prompt, effective and economical means of dispute resolution is an important element in the orderly growth and encouragement of international trade and investment. Increasingly, ADR(Alternative Dispute Resolution) including arbitration and mediation, instead of litigation in national courts, has become the preferred means of resolving private international commercial disputes. Under the situation, efforts for settlement of trade and investment disputes by ADR have been made between Korea and China through trade and investment agreements and arbitration agreement. Judging from the importance of economic exchange between Korea and Qingdao including Shandong Province, The Korean Commercial Arbitration Board(KCAB) and The Qingdao Arbitration Commission(QAC) should strengthen mutual cooperation to develop efficient methods of resolving commercial disputes arising between the two countries and to assist parties in solving those disputes through conclusion of arbitral agreement. Recently, efforts for conclusion of a Korea-China-Japan Free Trade Agreement(FTA) received strong support at Korea-Japan and Korea-China Summit Meeting held on June and July, 2003 respectively. If the conclusion of FTA among the three countries would be realized, it would promote regional trade and investment, contributing to economic growth in the Northeast Asian region. Under the circumstances, the key arbitral institutions including KCAB and QAC should consider to take the initiative in setting up tentatively called ${\ulcorner}$Joint Arbitration Center for Northeast Asia${\lrcorner}$ for which the CAMCA of NAFTA will be the good example.

• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.34 no.1
• /
• pp.75-101
• /
• 2024

"ESG management" guides companies to prioritize corporate social responsibility and sustainable development as key management objectives, going beyond mere financial performance pursuits. This approach involves creating a sustainable and robust supply chain by urging companies, acting as 'supply chain managers', to implement ESG management practices alongside their 'supply chain partners'. The domestic business community has been quick to respond to this trend, recognizing that failure to adhere to ESG standards set by organizations such as the EU and SEC could lead to severe repercussions, including exclusion from international trade and reputational damage. POSCO and NAVER, two leading Korean companies, are at the forefront of practicing ESG management effectively. They have both produced and publicly disclosed ESG management reports, showcasing their success in enhancing supply chain ESG management. However, as supply chain managers enforce ESG-related obligations on their suppliers, the likelihood of disputes between the parties may increase. In scenarios where supply chain ESG management leads to conflicts between supply chain managers and suppliers, commercial arbitration emerges as a viable solution for dispute resolution. This method offers several advantages, including the arbitrators' expertise, time and cost efficiency, the binding nature of decisions akin to a court's final judgment, international recognition under the New York Convention, confidentiality, and ample opportunity for parties to be heard. Our analysis focuses on the emerging disputes between supply chain managers and suppliers within the context of supply chain ESG management, particularly examining the cases of POSCO and NAVER. By categorizing the expected types of disputes and assessing the appropriateness of commercial arbitration for their resolution, we highlight the effectiveness of this approach. Furthermore, we propose leveraging the Korean Commercial Arbitration Board's role to enhance the use of arbitration in resolving supply chain ESG disputes, underscoring its potential as a strategic tool for maintaining sustainable and harmonious supply chain relationships.

• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.27 no.1
• /
• pp.3-35
• /
• 2017

For recent years, several disputes between Korean consumers and multinational companies have arisen. Since the disputes were big and material that children's safety was at issue, a question started if Korean law properly has protected consumers' rights against multinational companies. While the Korean legal society tried to legislate punitive compensation with this concern, the U.S. Supreme Court reached an interesting case law regarding consumer contracts. A recent trend on consumer contracts in the United States shows that general terms have arbitration clause with class action waiver. As much as international arbitration has worked as the most effective resolution in international commercial disputes, the concept is still foreign and the experts are not approachable to lay individual consumers. However, class action in arbitration can hugely help for lay individual consumers to bring a case before arbitration tribunal. California courts consistently showed the analysis that the practical impact of prohibiting class action in arbitration clause is to ban lay individual consumers from fighting for their rights. However, the Supreme Court held that the arbitration clause shall be enforced as parties agree even if consumers practically cannot fight for their rights in the end. Even though consumer contracts are a typical example of lack of parity and of adhesive contract, the Supreme Court still applies liberalism that parties are equal in power and free to agree. This case law has a crucial implication since Korean consumers buy goods and services from the U.S. and other countries in everyday life. Accordingly, they are deemed to agree on the dispute resolution clauses, which might violate their constitutional right to bring their cases before the adjudication tribunal. This issue could be more important than adopting punitive compensation because consumers' rights are not necessarily governed by Korean law but by the governing law of the general terms and conditions chosen and written by the multinational companies. Thus this paper studies and analyzes the practical reality of international arbitration and influence of arbitration clause with class action waiver with the U.S. Supreme Court and California case laws.

• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.28 no.4
• /
• pp.89-110
• /
• 2018

The purposes of this study are as follows: First, this study reviews the Online Dispute Resolution (ODR) regulations of the EU to resolve disputes which can arise in international e-commerce in the future. Second, this study tries to seek out alternative solutions to dispute resolutions based on these regulations. Third, this study increases the efficiency of the transactions by proposing effective and satisfactory dispute resolution methods for international e-commerce. First, this study reviews the concept of cross-border e-commerce, generally explores ODR, and creates comparisons with Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR). Subsequently, this study looks into domestic ODR system and analyzes the regulations of EU ODR. This study suggests the implications of the European ODR regulations in the conclusion. The EU ODR platform is considered greatly significant in that it has increased the possibility of settlements in small disputes by enhancing consumers' accessibility to ADR procedures. Therefore, this thesis proposes a method for Korean companies to resolve disputes that may arise in e-commerce with EU by using the ODR platform. As a result, it is expected to increase the competitiveness of Korean companies in the EU market. Both legislative trends related to the ODR of the EU and establishment of the EU ODR platform have significant implications for Korean businesses in Europe. This study is expected to be useful for our businesses in the EU in reviewing the applicability of the EU ODR regulations and the dispute settlement procedures through the EU ODR platform. In addition, this study is expected to prove useful in relation to consumer protection by enhancing consumers' accessibility to dispute settlement institutions in domestic electronic commerce.

• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.12 no.1
• /
• pp.271-321
• /
• 2002

Every year, many million of business transactions take place. Ocassionally, disagreements develop over these business transactions. Many of these disputes are resolved by mediation, arbitration and out-of-court settlement options. The American Arbitration Association(AAA) helps resolve a wide range of disputes through mediation, arbitration, elections and other out-of-court settlement procedures. The AAA offers a broad range of dispute resolution services to business executives, attorneys, individuals, trade associations, unions, management, consumers, families, communities, and all level of governments. The 198,491 cases composed of the 194,303 arbitration cases and the 4,188 mediation cases, were filed with the AAA in 2000. These case filings represent a full range of matters, including commercial finance, construction, labor and employment, environmental, health care, insurance, real state, securities, and technology disputes. The Korean Commercial Arbitration Board (KCAB) does more than render arbitration services. It helps facilitate settlements and guarantee implementation thereof between trading partners at home and abroad involving disputes related to such areas as the sale of commodities, construction, joint venture agreements, technical assistance, agency agreements, and maritime transport. The 643 cases composed of the the 197 arbitration cases and the 446 mediation cases, were filed with the KCAB in 2001. There are some differences between the AAA and the KCAB regarding the number and the area of mediation and arbitration case filings, the breath of service offerings, the scope of alternative dispute resolution, and the education and training. In order to apply to the proceedings of the commercial mediation and arbitration, the AAA has the Commercial Mediation Rules, the Commercial Arbitration Rules, the Expedited Procedures, the Optional Procedures for Large, Complex Commerical Dispute, and the Optional Rules for Emergency Measures of Protection as amended and effective on September 1, 2000. In order to apply to the proceedings of commercial arbitration, the KCAB has the Arbitration Rules as amended by the Supreme Court on April 27, 2000, which have been changed to incorporate the revisions of the Arbitration Act that went into effect on December 31, 1999. There are some differences between the AAA's commercial Arbitration Rules and the KCAB's Arbitration Rules regarding the clauses of jurisdiction and administrative conference, number of arbitrators, communication with arbitrator, vacancies, preliminary hearing, exchange of information, oaths, evidence by affidavit and posthearing filing of documents or others, interim measures, serving of notice, form of award, scope of award, delivery of award to parties, modification of award, release of liability, administrative fees, neutral arbitrator's compensation, and expedited procedures. In conclusion, for the vitalization of KCAB and its ADR system, the following measures should be taken : the effective case management, the development of on0-line ADR, the establishment of ADR system of electronic commerce disputes, and the variety of dispute resolution rules in each expert field.

• Korea Trade Review
• /
• v.43 no.5
• /
• pp.139-158
• /
• 2018

As trade volume increases and the business environment becomes more complex and competitive, international trade disputes are also increasing and becoming more complex. Parties need to become more aware of alternatives to costly and time consuming arbitration and litigation. The ADR (Alternative Dispute Resolution) can encompass all dispute resolution processed and can act as a substitute for traditional litigation. Mediation, a type of ADR, offers an amicable dispute settlement mechanism between concerned parties through a natural mediator. There are several strong points of mediation compared with litigation or arbitration. First of all, mediation can take place without having to complete time-consuming and expensive discovery processes associated with litigation. In addition, since mediation is considered a private process, the dispute can remain out of the public eye. It can be embarrassing and disrupt business when customer or suppliers learn that a company is involved in litigation. Lastly, mediation is less adversarial than litigation or arbitration, so the parties often can salvage their relationships. Often the parties to mediation find themselves continuing to conduct business. In spite of such benefits of mediation, it is less used in Korea and therefore, this article aims to promote the mediation system in international trade disputes. However, this paper has limitation, for example, why ADR is not used well in Korea and need to suggest how ADR can work best in international trade disputes.