References
- 김경배, "중재인의 공정성과 독립성에 관한 연구", 중재연구, 한국중재학회 제18권 제1호, 2008년.
- 김진현, 정용균, "미국의 중재판정 취소에 관한 연구:판례법과 제정법의 조화를 중심으로", 중재연구, 한국중재학회 제22권 제2호, 2012년.
- 신한동, "중재인의 고지의무에 관한 고찰 -한국 대법원판례를 중심으로-", 중재연구, 한국중재학회 제21권 제3호, 2011년.
- American Arbitration Association, Canon II, Code of Ethics.
- Ameser v. Nordstrom, Inc., 442 F. App'x 967, 968 (5th Cir. 2011)(percuriam).
- Ann Ryan Robertson, Feature, International Arbitration in the U.S.: Evident Partiality Based on Nondisclosure: Betwixt and Between, 45 HOUSTON LAWYER 22, 23 (2007).
- Applied Industry materials Corp., 492 F.3d at 137.
- Applied Indus. Materials Corp., 492 F.3d at 138.
- ARIAS-US, https://www.arias-us.org/ (2016년 5월 10일 방문)
- Availl, Inc. v. Ryder Sys., 110 F.3d 892, 895 (2d. Cir. 1997)
- Travelers Indemnity v. Gerling Global Reinsurance Corp., 2001 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 6684 (S.D.N.Y. 2001).
-
California Code of Civil procedure
${\S}$ 1297.121. - Catherine A. Rogers, Regulating International Arbitrators: A Functional Approach to Developing Standards of Conduct, 41 Stan. J. Int'l L. 53, 117-20 (2005).
- Christopher D. Kratovil, Anne M. Johnson, Evident Partiality, 65 The Advoc. (Texas) 52 (2013).
- Claudia T. Salomon, et al., Arbitrator's Disclosure Standards: The Uncertainty Continues, 63 Dispute Resolution Journal 76, at 79 (2008).
- Commonwealth Coatings Corp. v. Cont'l Cas. Co., 393 U.S. 145 (1968)(plurality opinion).
- Commonwealth Coatings Corp. v. Cont'l Cas. Co., 382 F.2d 1010 (1st Cir. 1967).
- Commonwealth Coatings Corp., 393 U.S. at 146-47.
- Commonwealth Coatings Corp., 393 U.S. at 149.
- Commonwealth Coatings Corp., 393 U.S. at 151 (White, J.,concurring).
- Federal Arbitration Act, (9 U.S.C. section 10(a)).
- Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Arbitration Rules, 2200. Communications and Disclosures.
- General Standard 7(c), International Bar Association Guidelines on Conflicts of Interest in International Arbitration, 2004.
- Geoff Nicholas & Constantine Partasides, LCIA Court Decision on Challenges to Arbitrators; A Proposal to Publish, 23 Arb. Int. 1 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1093/arbitration/23.1.1
- HSMV Corp. v. ADI Ltd., 72 F.Supp. 2d 1122, 1129 (C.D. Cal. 1999).
- Peter L. Michaelson, In International Arbitration, Disclosure Rules at the Place of Enforcement Matter Too, 62 Disp. Resol. J. no.4, Nov. 2007-Jan. 2008, at 82,85.
- Positive Software Solutions, Inc. v. New Century Mortg., 436 F.3d 495, 504 (5th Cir. 2006),rev'd on reh'g en banc, 476 F.3d 278 (5th Cir. 2007).
- Savers Prop. and Cas. Co., et al v. Nat'l Union Fire Ins. Co., 748 F.3d 708, 717 (6th Cir. 2014).
- Schmitz, 20 F.3d 1043, 9th Cir. (1994).
- Smith v. Am. Arbitration Ass'n, 233 F.3d 502, 506 (7th Cir. 2000).
- Steven Smith et al., International Commercial Dispute Resolution, 42 Int'l Law 363, 368-69 (2008).
- Sussex v. United States Dist. Court for the Dis. of Nev., 781 F.3d 1065 (9th Cir. 2014).
- Tempo Shain Corp. v. Bertek, Inc., 120 F.3d, 16, 19 (2d Cir. 1997).
- Timothy W. Stalker, et al., Vacating Arbitration Awards Due To "Evident Partiality" Under The Federal Arbitration Act, 83 Defense Counsel Journal 207, 210 (2016).
Cited by
- 중국의 상사중재서비스 개방에 관한 연구 - 외국중재기관의 중국 내 상업적 주재를 통한 중재 서비스 제공을 중심으로 vol.30, pp.4, 2016, https://doi.org/10.16998/jas.2020.30.4.31