• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.23 no.1
• /
• pp.153-175
• /
• 2013

The issue of patent validity becomes a subject of dispute under the FTA and there is a definite difference of opinion between China, Japan, and Korea. In other words, the validity of a judgment on the patent was exclusively under the jurisdiction of the administrative agency at a particular patent office. Thus, the issue arises where there is a potential judgment on patent validity. In this case, the Supreme Court rather than the patent office can offer a judgment from a judicial institution and can make a judgment in the case of a medication. In China, however, the lowest possibility of judgment on patent validity is predicted to occur in judicial institutions. Such a judgment is recognized as the Grand Bench Decision in Korea, and the court can judge the patent validation rather than the patent office. That is just the case in the Kilby case-it is invalid for reasons obvious in Japan. Therefore, there is a substantial difference between the three countries. Especially in Japan, where after the Kilby case, they revised the patent law in 2004 to introduce Article 104-3, placing the judgment of patent validity in the court, even if the "Apparentness"is not requisite. Per this law, infringers can argue for patent invalidity not only the judgment of the patent invalidation but also the infringement lawsuit. From the point of view of Japan, Korea became the judgment of trademark validation by extension and obvious cases can become directly to judge through the Supreme Court about the right that needs to examinations and registrations. In terms of the mediation, it also provides a clue about the judgment of intellectual property validation and expands the scope of the mediation in the future. From now on, in order to have active mediation procedures in the three countries, China, Japan, and Korea would need to unify regulations and application scopes for mediation in the FTA negotiation and to look forward to achieve a vigorous mediation approach.

• Journal of Korean Society of Occupational and Environmental Hygiene
• /
• v.31 no.1
• /
• pp.38-49
• /
• 2021

Objectives: This study was conducted to analyze the impact of safety/health managers' experience of trauma case on their post traumatic stress disorder and the mediation effects of job stress and the moderated mediation effects of social support. Method: Using a structured questionnaire, data were collected from 241 workplace safety/health managers with experience in trauma case. The collected data were analyzed using SPSS(IBM. Ver.26.0) and verified through SPSS PROCESS Macro (Ver. 3.4). Results: The trauma case experience and the job stress, which is a mediation variable, had a statistically significant positive effect on post-traumatic stress disorder, and the job stress had a positive mediation effect in the relationship between the trauma case experience and post-traumatic stress disorder. Social support had a statistically significant negative moderation effect in the relationship between the trauma case experience and job stress; social support had a moderated mediation effect on the indirect effect of a job stress on the post-traumatic effect through a trauma case experience. Conclusion: The above findings suggest that work-related job stress management is important in order to reduce safety/health managers' post-traumatic stress disorder caused by the experience of trauma case, and that social support is essential to reduce the job stress, which can later be used as a basis for further studies.

• International conference on construction engineering and project management
• /
• 2011.02a
• /
• pp.357-363
• /
• 2011

Mediation has long been praised as one of effective dispute resolution methods in the area of construction law. Article 85-1 of the Taiwan Government Procurement Act was amended and promulgated by presidential decree on July 4, 2007. The second paragraph of the Article elaborates explicitly, "In the event that the application for mediation referred to in the preceding paragraph is made by the supplier, the agency may not object to such application." Beyond that, if an unsuccessful mediation of a construction dispute is due to the agency's disagreeing with the proposal or resolution for mediation proposed by the Complaint Review Board for Government Procurement ("CRBGP"), the agency may not object to the arbitration filed by the supplier. It undoubtedly reinforces the importance of the mediation-arbitration procedure. Accordingly, this paper elaborates on the mediation mechanism in Taiwan in the framework of construction disputes first. After that, dispute resolution of a local public work case is provided to demonstrate the practice of construction mediation in Taiwan. Lastly, this study proposes suggestions on applying mediation to ease similar subsequent cases.

• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.69
• /
• pp.523-541
• /
• 2016

According to Chinese Arbitration Law, combination of mediation with arbitration means that in the process of arbitration, arbitrator may conduct mediation proceedings for the case they are handling, provided both parties agree to do so. If mediation succeeds and the parties reach a settlement agreement, the arbitrators may render a consent award or a written mediation statement in accordance with the contents of the settlement agreement. If mediation fails, the arbitration proceedings will be resumed until the case is concluded by making of an arbitral award. There is no formal name of this system in China, it is called "combination of mediation with arbitration", "mediation in arbitration process" or "arbitration-mediation", the author of this thesis select "arbitration-mediation" and make it simply as "Arb-Med". This thesis concentrates on three issues that arbitrators and the parties have to clarify and pay attention to once they choose to use Arb-Med. The first part is about the 'waivable problems', include waive the right to challenge a arbitrator who act as a mediator at the same time with parties' approval, as well as the question about the waiver of the arbitrator's duty to disclose confidential information obtained during mediation. The second part is 'public policy in Arb-Med', introduces the concept of public policy, the bias may arise the complaint about public policy, and the due procedure problem. And the last part is about the award deals with a difference not contemplated by or not falling within the terms of the submission to arbitration, or it contains decisions on matters beyond the scope of the submission to arbitration, especially about the award including some contents which has relation to third party's interests.

• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.12 no.1
• /
• pp.89-122
• /
• 2002

Mediation is defined most simply as facilitated negotiation. An impartial third party(the mediator) facilitates negotiations between disputants or the disputants' representatives in their search for a resolution of their dispute. The disputants remain responsible for negotiating a settlement; the mediator's role is to assist the process in ways acceptable to the disputants. Sometimes this means merely providing a forum for negotiations or convening the negotiations. More often it menas helping the disputants find areas of common ground for resolution, offering alternatives, supervising the bargaining, then drafting the final settlement. mediation can occur between two disputants seeking to resolve one issue, or among many disputants seeking to resolve several issues. The disputants can participate in mediation themselves or they can have representatives negotiate for them. Mediation most often is a voluntary process. In Korea, as mediation could not have developed for lack of people's correct understanding on it, there must be enlightenment against the people, and it needs subsidiary from government and support from lawers. In order for the lawers to accomplish their role in progressing mediation procedure favorably, they should study and develope on the skill on mediate the case. Furthermore through the good mediation system, it also needs to induce the parties to participate in mediation procedure voluntarily. On the other hand, It also needs to bring up and develope the ADR institution to proceed the mediation impartially and effectively, and let them improve the mediation systems, like the Korean Commercial Arbitration Board.

• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.19 no.2
• /
• pp.27-47
• /
• 2009

Concepts of mediation and conciliation as alternative dispute resolutions are often confusingly used. As to what is meant by mediation and conciliation, there is no uniform legal definition. However, there has been a distinction between two methods of dispute settlement under the international law (UN Charter, WTO DSU, NAFTA, EU mediation directive, WIPO Mediation Rules) although there is no clear definition on the terms of mediation and conciliation. And also under the domestic law such as U.K, France, Germany, a clear distinction has been made between two terms. Mediation means a facilitated negotiation between two parties through the intervention of a third party. A third and neutral party (mediator) help the parties in dispute to find their solution by managing a certain mediation protocol and facilitating communication between the parties while in conciliation, a third party evaluative the case and can suggest the parties a legally non-binding solution. Once the parties accept it, it becomes binding between them. However, in the U.S,, it seems that there is no practical use of distinguishing mediation and conciliation. The term of mediation is more commonly used than the term of conciliation and it has two kinds of mediation such as facilitative and evaluative mediation. Korea's conciliation system is close to conciliation or evaluative mediation. In conclusion, what is distinct between mediation and conciliation is the role of third party. If a neutral third party takes a role of advisor or facilitator, then he or she may employ a proper protocol to help the parties to find themselves their solution (mediation) while if a neutral person plays a role of evaluator, then he or she listens to the parties and suggest a solution to them (conciliation).

• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.21 no.1
• /
• pp.87-107
• /
• 2011

There are two methods to resolve conflicts related to constructions which are through lawsuits and ADR (Alternative Dispute Resolution) just like any other conflicts. Along with the special characteristics pertaining to the conflicts related to constructions, the advantages that ADR is in possession of such as its cost, duration and professionalism, resolving conflicts through ADR has been considered to be more logical than any other options recently. In Korea's case at present, the resolution of conflicts regarding constructions through ADR is mostly dependent on administrative mediation or through arbitration. However, in the case of the administrative mediation, its usage rate is very low due to problems caused by problems in its running and effectiveness. In the case of arbitration, the services of the Korean Commercial Arbitration Board is comparatively used more but because of the fact that arbitration relies on a single trial system and the fact that its executive powers while having the same effectiveness as the final ruling does not get acknowledged leads to the phenomena of avoiding its usage. In addition, in relation to the selective arbitration clause, the problem of effectiveness of the arbitrative agreement is becoming a hindrance to the activation and promotion of the arbitration process. Furthermore, in the case where the ordering body is the government, the public servant involved in the case avoiding the arbitration process because of concerns of being penalized by the internal and external audit within the institution is becoming a problem as well. These problems are not only limited to conflicts regarding constructions and there needs to be actions taken to promote the activation of ADR by enacting a basic law. The more important issue at hand however is offering a resolution measure that would be the most appropriate for users and this could probably be done only through actions such as implementing the American partnering system or the dispute adjudication board system so that they can supervise the resolution of conflicts through mediation, arbitration, and assistance as well as offering consultations regarding conflicts related to constructions.

• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.17 no.2
• /
• pp.189-219
• /
• 2007

Mediation is type of intervention in which the disputing parties accept the offer of the judge or a third party to recommend a solution for their controversy. Mediation differs from arbitration in being a voluntary resolution rather than a judicial procedure. Thus, the parties to the dispute are not bound to accept the mediator's recommendation. Resort to mediation has become increasingly frequent for civil disputes. Mediation has been successful in many cases of civil conflict. Mediation has become increasingly important for monetary disputes as well, particularly in damage cases. While most people consider mediation a far superior experience to court, everything I tell you a mediator should not do is something that at least one mediator I have dealt with has done to a client. In theory, a mediator should never share anything you tell him or her without your permission. In theory a mediator should not "spring" evaluations on anyone in a mediation without your permission (e.g. a mediator should never say "your case is worth \OOOO and I just told the other side that). In theory a mediator should not browbeat or threaten you. At the end, usually about 55% of the time with a good mediator in Kwangju Appellate Court in 2003, the parties reach an agreement that is in their best interests. If they decide to sign off on a signed agreement, the signed agreement is binding. I obviously feel mediation is a very good thing and the numbers and surveys bear me out. This article is written about how mediation is proceeded, what is the realities, what is the problem and what is the activating way. For this study, I research with legal sociological approach using Korean Judicial Year Boot judicial document and my experience as meditator in Kwangju District Court.

• Management & Information Systems Review
• /
• v.30 no.4
• /
• pp.253-292
• /
• 2011

This study is significant of groping for the autonomous perspective of a medication system for the establishment of harmonious regional labor-management relationship and investigating a plan to minimize previously labor disputes through both analyzing mediation cases and finding out any core issue from the labor-management relationship, with matters experienced in the mediation field when I had served as a mediator. Specially, this study has also objectives to prevent previously any labor dispute through analyzing and minimizing the issue of the labor dispute by case and to establish harmonious labor-management relationship thereby. Further since it is necessary to understand the organization and roles of the regional labor relations commission in order to understand the concrete matters in respect of the labor dispute mediation, this study shall be to explore in detail the matters relating hereto and to acquire general knowledge of mediation through case analysis. Additionally, there is little studies exploring alternative research for the establishment of reasonable labor-management relationship with core issues referred a mediation to the labor relations commission through both the position heightening of the labor relations commission and the analysis of core issues until now. Thus, this study may provide a theoretical base for raising a technique to enhance negotiation skill through acquiring the previous training or full knowledge on the approaching manner to be taken by the labor and management in the collective bargaining or wage bargaining on the basis of items analyzed by core issue. The heightening perspectives to be acquired through the analysis of 50 or more mediation cases are as follows. First, it deems to be important what position each mediation party takes. Second, the information acquired by an investigator in the preliminary investigation before holding the mediation is very importantly utilized in the mediation. Third, the gumption of mediators in charge of the mediation is very helpful for the resolution of a case. Fourth, it shall be preceding to understand dispute issues. After reviewing fully the investigation report of an investigator, if separate review is required, it is tried to hold a separate meeting and then reduce the number of issues asserted by the labor & management and, if the number of such issues is reduced, the mediation may approach to be concluded. Fifth, it shall be kept in mind that any matter other than the scope of the law be based on not the judgement of mediator but the legal interpretation. Sixth, it is necessary for both labor and management parties to take a positive approach so as to make the healthy labor & management relationship anchored. Seventh, notwithstanding the mediators are part-time and take a service attitude, it shall be encouraged to abstain from slandering or inveighing against the mediators because the mediation is taken against oneself. Eighth, it is necessary to convert the management's recognition about a labor union. Ninth, it is necessary to not raise any issue on the matters, such as time-off system and multiple labor union, etc., which are legally enforced. Tenth, it is confirmed that the regional labor relations commission plays a bridge role of narrowing down the issue difference between the labor and management.

• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.19 no.1
• /
• pp.67-98
• /
• 2009

Recently there are many cases on the intellectual property dispute. Among them some cases are solved through mediation and arbitration. Mediation and arbitration hold some advantage over court proceeding for intellectual property dispute. However the traditional litigation system has material limitation to settle down international intellectual property dispute. Without arbitration, litigation in court would be the only choice in case of no consensual settlement between the disputing parties. However, once being aware of the usefulness of the arbitration, people in international business widely realize that arbitration is generally preferred to litigation. Mediation is a method of settling dispute outside of court setting and many mediation committee are established since 1986 in Korea. Arbitrability has been a crucial issue in the intellectual property dispute. In most developed countries including the U.S.A. and Switzerland, arbitrability in the intellectual property dispute has been changed in recent years by law. Now in resolving the dispute with international intellectual property is needed for legal research, experience, working practices and knowledge of the intellectual property industry and so on.