• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.19 no.2
• /
• pp.139-171
• /
• 2018

The 「Act on Remedies for Injuries from Medical Malpractice and Mediation of Medical Disputes」(hereinafter referred to as 'the Act on Mediation of Medical Disputes') provides that the state should compensate the victims of medical accidents occurred irresistibly in childbirth despite that health and medical service personnel fulfilled their duty of care for their damage within the range of its budget(Article 46 of the Act on Mediation of Medical Disputes). Given that victims of medical accidents could expect demage recovery only through lawsuits thus far, this act can be said to be a groundbreaking act. However, However, as 30% of the costs for such medical accident compensation projects are borne by those who have records of childbirth among the founders of health and medical institutions (Article 21 of the Act on Mediation of Medical Disputes), there has been a question about whether doctors are held responsible despite that the accidents such as the deaths of mothers and newborn babies occurred irresistibly without doctors' fault. However, recently, the Constitutional Court ruled that 'the range of founders of health and medical institutions' and 'share ratios of finances for compensation' in Article 46 (3) of the Act on Mediation of Medical Disputes' related to the imposition of the share of costs are institutional (Constitutional Court ruling dated April 26, 2018, 2015Heonga13, hereinafter referred to as 'the ruling in the case'). Although the ruling in the case was made based on only the principle of statutory reservation and the principle of ban on comprehensive authorization, this paper added a practical judgment. This paper proved that the share of costs in this case has the nature of burden charges in pursuit of study and does not infringe on the property rights of the founders of health medical institutions even in light of the principle of proportionality because there is a legitimate reason for imposing the burden charge. The imposition of the share of costs in the system for compensation for medical accidents occurred irresistibly is against the principle of liability with fault in part. However, the medical accident compensation projects are rational a national policy for the victims of medical accidents and the medical world clearly gains some benefits from the effect to terminate medical disputes. The expansion of finances for compensation through the payments of the share of costs will reduce the suffering and misunderstanding of victims of medical accidents occurred in the process of childbirth and will be very helpful to the construction of stable treatment environments of medical workers by quickly establishing the medical accident compensation projects as such.

• Proceedings of the Korean Institute Of Construction Engineering and Management
• /
• autumn
• /
• pp.341-344
• /
• 2002

Claims are on an increasing trend in the domestic construction field with changes of negative thought about them. But there are still many factors of causing disputes Potentially due to old customs that an owner is predominant over a contractor. Unless these factors are solved, it is obvious that many disputes will occur henceforward. This study derives claim factors that must be solved first of all through analyzing how claim factors influence construction management factors such as time, cost, quality, and presents countermeasures that may prevent these claims.

• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.54
• /
• pp.3-44
• /
• 2012

Shipbuilding industry is one of the most influential ones in Korea. As shipbuilding industry is labor-intensive, it contributes to enhancing both local economy and national economy. Shipbuilding industry has been downsizing since the end of 2008 due to global financial crisis caused by America's sub-prime mortgage and aggravated by European countries' fiscal deficit. As a large fund is required for a single normal shipbuilding contract, fund raising is one of the most important elements in shipbuilding contract. Shipbuilding contract, requires refund guarantee in order for a buyer to reimburse the progressive payment paid to a builder. The disputes under shipbuilding contracts are mostly settled by arbitration rather than by law suit. English laws and English courts have been preferred for the choice of law as well as for the choice of forum. Due to depreciation of the ship value since the end of 2008, a number of buyers are trying to cancel the contract by raising unjust claim under the contract. Once disputes occurs regarding shipbuilding contract, a large amount of loss is inevitable. In order to mitigate the disputes arising from the shipbuilding contract, careful caution is required in drafting a shipbuilding contract.

• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.44
• /
• pp.239-255
• /
• 2009

The purpose of this article is to examine the Utilization of Umbrella Clauses in Investor-State Contract Disputes. To accomplish the purpose, this article analyzes the ICSID case of SGS v. Pakistan and SGS v. Philippines. Umbrella clauses have become a regular feature of international investment agreements and have been included to provide additional protection to investors by covering the contractual obligations in investment agreements between host countries and foreign investors. In particular, two recent ICSID decisions, SGS v. Pakistan and SGS v. Philippines, have brought to the forefront the question of whether the umbrella clause applies to obligations arising under otherwise independent investment contracts between the investor and the host State. In focusing on the SGS decisions, this article will give some useful guidelines to Government and Academia under currently prevailing environment of the Free Trade Agreement("FTA") in Korea.

• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.18 no.2
• /
• pp.149-171
• /
• 2008

The purpose of this paper is to examine the Measures against Risks in International Investment Agreement: focusing on Umbrella Clause and MIGA. Umbrella Clauses have become a regular feature of international investment agreements and have been included to provide additional protection to investors by covering the contractual obligations in investment agreements between host countries and foreign investors. The meaning of umbrella clauses is one of the most controversial issues with which international arbitral tribunals have been recently confronted with while adjudicating investment disputes brought before them MIGA issues guarantees against non-commercial risks for investments, such as: currency transfer restrictions, expropriations, war and civil disturbances and breach of contract by host governments, and the case that the investor obtains an arbitration award or judical decision for damages and is unable to enforce it after a specified period. Furthermore, MIGA undertakes a wide range of mediation activities designed to remove obstacles to the flow of foreign direct investment in its developing member countries.

• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.23 no.2
• /
• pp.1-35
• /
• 2013

In the 21th century, its important role in international commercial disputes has established arbitration as the preferred form of dispute resolution. Because commercial disputes have become more complicated and varied with their quantitative increase, it is important that they be settled in a reasonable and rapid manner. Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) is now regarded as one of the most effective dispute resolution methods for the settling of commercial disputes and merits notice. Arbitration is a form of dispute resolution in which two parties agree to have their dispute resolved by one or more arbitrators and thereby avoid what could be costly and time-consuming court battles. Often contracts mandate that disputes be settled through arbitration. These arbitration clauses also frequently prohibit plaintiffs from banding together to bring an action on behalf of a larger class. An arbitration agreement is an agreement by parties to summit to arbitration all or certain disputes which have arisen or which may arise between them with respect to their defined legal relationship, whether contractual or not. According to the Supreme Court, general elective arbitration clauses may be considered valid in light of all the relevant facts. Arbitration has been the subject of a great deal of research and the scope of effect in arbitration agreements is a promising avenue for future research.

• 중국학논총
• /
• no.72
• /
• pp.101-122
• /
• 2021

Over the past 20 years, labor standards have been widely used in free trade agreements. The U.S., the European Union and China have all aggressively signed free trade agreements with their trading partners, developing different styles on labor standards. According to the study, the implementation of the KOREa-EU FREE trade agreement has been hampered by ongoing disputes over the terms of the FREE trade agreement and the ILO since the korea-EU free trade agreement was signed. Because in order to break this deadlock, relevant scholars have done a lot of research, but mainly focused on the economic and trade field. Therefore, this paper for the first time systematically studies the substantive focus of disputes over FTA and ILO clauses, and carefully analyzes the domestic law amended by South Korea, and provides suggestions and inspirations for China by drawing lessons from the revision model of South Korea's domestic law. This is from a newperspective: the essence of the korea-EU FTA and ILO disputes is the conflict between international law and domestic law, and the conflict between free trade agreements and human rights protection. It holds that the essence of disputes should be sorted out from the perspective of legal principles and human rights protection, and the free trade and human rights protection should be actively coordinated. In order to make China more actively integrate into the international economy, China should adopt a positive attitude to revise and perfect its own laws, so as to realize the purpose of common development of international trade and human rights protection.

• The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy
• /
• v.30 no.1
• /
• pp.65-94
• /
• 2015

Since American Airlines launched AAdvantage which was the first Frequent Flyer Program in 1981, many people has accumulated mileage credits, and now, frequent flyer program(FFP) is the universal marketing tool to the airlines. These days, airlines establish a strategic alliance with domestic and foreign companies of various fields ; other airlines, travel agencies, car hire firms, hotels, department stores, even credit card companies. However, more people want to use their mileage credits, more airlines reject to approve that or change frequent flyer program against their customers. Last year, Northwest, Inc. v. Ginsberg, the United State Supreme Court made a decision that the preemption provision of Airlines Deregulation Act(ADA) preempts state laws related to rates, routes and services for air carriers including implied covenant of good faith and fare dealing. Thus, the claim of Ginsberg was canceled, it means that Northwest Inc. could terminated one-sidedly his membership in the frequent flyer program. In the contrast, Korea does not have the statute like ADA. If customers file a claim on FFP like Ginsberg, the courts of Korea judge whether the clauses of standard form contract are unfair or not. Therefore, in this article, Ginsberg would be checked on legal issues and be compared briefly with the courts' ruling in Korea.

• Journal of Legislation Research
• /
• no.55
• /
• pp.193-237
• /
• 2018

The recent surge in the ISD lawsuit filed against the Korean government is likely to cause major domestic confusion. This is because in most cases, foreign investors have claimed billions of won in damages filed against Korea in the ISD lawsuit. Public opinion will be generated to abolish the ISD lawsuit system, which is included in the international investment agreement, when a decision comes out in the Elliott/Mason case or Lone Star case, which has already been completed by the hearing. It is clear that the ISD clause, which is commonly included in most of the BITs, FTAs, can be a limiting factor in the government's public policy, as shown by many investment disputes. However, it is not necessary to have a negative view of the ISD clause itself, given that it is a system that can protect Korean investors from illegal and inappropriate actions by local governments. Since Korea already allows the system of ISD lawsuits with many countries through FTAs and BITs, and negotiations are underway to sign FTAs with new countries, the possibility that foreign investors will refer to the ISD proceeding further to our government's public policy will increase. In order to prepare for an ISD lawsuit, the Korean government has launched a response team consisting of government practitioners, private scholars, and legal professionals in the central government ministries to review major legal issues that are controversial in the cases of the ISD. In particular, local governments and public institutions, which fail to recognize the importance of international investment regulations and ISD clause, need to share and train relevant information so that all processes for public policy planning and implementation comply with international investment rules such as BITs and FTAs.

• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.24 no.2
• /
• pp.33-52
• /
• 2014

Although climate change is a global scale question, some concerns have been raised that principles of investment arbitration may not adequately address the domestic implementation of climate change measures. A recent ICSID investment arbitration of Vattenfall v. Germany with regard to the investor's alleged damages from the phase-out of nuclear plants is a salient climate change case. The 2005 Kyoto Protocol was made to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and it provides a number of flexible mechanisms such as Joint Implementation (JI) and Clean Development Mechanism (CDM). Implementation of the Kyoto Protocol allows dispute settlement through investor-state arbitration. Any initiation of stricter emission standards can violate the prohibition on expropriations in investment agreements, regardless of the measures created to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The effect-based expropriation doctrine can charge changes to existing emission standards as interference with the use of property that goes against the legitimate expectation of a foreign investor. In regulatory chill, threat of investor claims against the host state may preclude the strengthening of climate change measures. Stabilization clauses also have a freezing effect on the hosting state's regulation and a new law applicable to the investment. In the fair and equitable standard, basic expectations of investors when entering into earlier carbon-intensive operations can be affected by a regulation seeking to change into a low-carbon approach. As seen in the Methanex tribunal, a non-discriminatory and public purpose of environmental protection measures should be considered as non-expropriation in the arbitral tribunal unless its decision would intentionally impede a foreign investor's investment.