• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.46
• /
• pp.61-104
• /
• 2010

The purpose of this work aims to analyse the principles of good faith under international transaction with CLOUT and UNILEX cases. Article 7(1) CISG sets the stage for the interpretation by promoting a uniform approach using good faith and the international charter of the convention. In other words, article 7(1) defines the purpose and the principle of interpretation and is applied to the Convention as a whole. As such, it also includes article 7(2), which goes beyond the big picture and settles the problems of gap filling. It is also important to understanding that the mandate of the CISG is to look for a solution, which is not only restricted to interpretation but extends to solving a problem. The problem in this work is to find out how gap filling is achieved and, because of the autonomous mandate of interpretation, to explain and understand its relationship with domestic law. The solution to the interpretation of article 7(2) must be found within the four corners of the CISG. To restate, article 7(2) describes two situations where gap filling is needed. First, if the matter is governed by the Convention but not expressly settled, then a gap must be filled in conformity with general principles on which it is based. Second, if the matter is not covered then the gap must be filled taking domestic law into consideration. There are two reasons why a matter may not be covered by the Convention. First and most obviously, it has been specifically exclude from the sphere of Application by the CISG itself, such as validity in article 4. Second, changes in business methods will lead to gaps. The United Nations has established a service known as CLOUT. This contains abstracts of hundreds of selected decisions of both courts and arbitration tribunals. And UNILEX is cosponsored by the Italian Centre for Comparative and Foreign Law Studies and UNIDROIT Contract Principles. The cases are in abstract format, but, when available, the full text of the case in the original language is also supplied.

• Korea Trade Review
• /
• v.43 no.3
• /
• pp.199-218
• /
• 2018

The force majeure in the international sale of goods has been widely used regarding liability and settlement of disputes in the event of breach of contract due to circumstances beyond the control of the parties. The purpose of this study is to examine the judgment criteria and cases concerning on force majeure in the application of FTA preferential tariffs. In order to achieve this purpose, this paper uses a literature review and case analysis on exceptional circumstances under the Korea·ASEAN FTA and the Korea·EU FTA. This study, this paper provides several implications for companies seeking preferential tariffs regarding the Korea·ASEAN FTA and the Korea·EU FTA. Korean companies are subject to the following: confirm the denial article of FTA preferential tariffs stipulated in the Korea·ASEAN FTA and the Korea·EU FTA, consider the judgment criteria on exceptional circumstances of customs authorities, confirm the extension criteria on the validity period of certificate of origin, confirm the reply criteria of verification result of the customs authorities of the exporting country, and confirm the violation of the principle of good faith for unrequested action on reply of verification result of customs authorities.

• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.62
• /
• pp.135-178
• /
• 2014

The Uniform Commercial Code (UCC) sets the standards of good faith in a commercial transaction for the sale of goods. With every sales contract, there is an implied obligation for both the seller and the buyer to negotiate the contract and perform under the terms of the contract in good faith. The agreement between both parties and the customs in the industry determine how the good faith standard should be applied to a particular transaction. Generally, the meaning of good faith, though always based on honesty, may vary depending on the specific context in which it is used. A person is said to buy in good faith when he or she holds an honest belief in his or her right or title to the property and has no knowledge or reason to know of any defect in the title. In section 1-201 of the UCC good faith is defined generally as "honesty in fact in the conduct or transaction concerned." Article 2 of the UCC says "good faith in the case of a merchant means honesty in fact and the observance of reasonable commercial standards of fair dealing in the trade." The sales contract will generally determine which party is required to perform first. This provision helps to determine if the buyer or the seller is in breach of the agreement due to failing to perform as stated by the contract. Either the seller must deliver the items before the buyer is required to accept and pay or the buyer must pay for the items before the seller has the duty to act in good faith and deliver the items in a reasonable manner. If the contract does not specifically define who is required to perform, industry customs and fair trade may determine what is acceptable for the transaction. Under the UCC, the buyer is required to pay for the goods when they are delivered, unless the contract states otherwise. Therefore, the UCC imposes an obligation of good faith on the performance of every contract or duty under its purview. The law also generally requires good faith of fiduciaries and agents acting on behalf of their principals. This article discusses problems of the principles of good faith under the UCC. Specifically, this paper focuses on the interpretation of UCC sections and analysis of various cases. By comparing, also, UCC and Korean law, the paper proposes some implications of good faith issues for Korean law.

• Asia-pacific Journal of Multimedia Services Convergent with Art, Humanities, and Sociology
• /
• v.6 no.7
• /
• pp.17-26
• /
• 2016

Information spill was occurred several times in the country due to the negligence of the large internet service providers including SK Communications, Auction, KT. In order to judge the Internet Service Provider(ISP)'s liability in individual data spill caused by hacking, the violation of existing legislation or general principle of law's good faith principle has to be examined. However, based on current ISP's good faith principle, there is no objective standard for judging liability. Such uncertain range of protection action duty based on good faith principle generates complaint toward companies, therefore presentation of objective judgement range index on how to determine this range is needed. However due to the legal characteristic of above-mentioned law, it is not possible to fix the range of protection action duty and regulate it on law. In order to resolve this, rather than concerning simply on legal system level, fusion approach method is needed. Thus, this research will discuss the measure for objective standard for predicting ISP's range of protection action duty through fusion view dividing in technical, legal and administrative aspects.

• Korea Trade Review
• /
• v.44 no.6
• /
• pp.285-302
• /
• 2019

Good faith is difficult to define due to the facts that there is not an objective and concrete concept of good faith, and good faith in contracts for the international sale of goods is a principle that parties to the contract must act with sincerity as members of a social community. The Korean Supreme Court shall pay attention to setting the applicable standards that can be universally applied to good faith based on the self-established criteria. Through such effort, it is possible not only to realize the value of concrete validity pursued by the general clause of good faith but also to realize the value of legal stability by assuring the predictability of results when applying good faith. In the modern sense, it can be said that the arbitrary application of general rules rather than the escape and general clauses is a problematic situation in the application of good faith, but this problem can be solved by setting a reasonable standard of good faith. This paper studies good faith in the view of Korean law, international laws, and related cases in contract law. The purpose of this paper is to find the problems and solutions of the practical application of good faith by analyzing the Korean case (2009Da86000), which undermined the legal stability of good faith in Korea.

• Journal of Korea Port Economic Association
• /
• v.25 no.2
• /
• pp.231-246
• /
• 2009

The time charterer depends on speed and bunker consumption rate of time chartered vessel because it is related charterers' benefit. It is important role of stipulated speed and daily bunker consumption rate at the Time Charter Party, it is generated any dispute against speed and daily bunker consumption rate deficiency. The case of dispute is a restricted word of stipulated speed and daily bunker consumption rate at Charter Party as "about", "good weather or good weather day", "smooth water", "ocean current" and "without guarantee". It happens a dispute against speed and daily bunker consumption rate because it is not well-educated as a vessel operator regarding Time Charter Party interpretation.

• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.63
• /
• pp.63-88
• /
• 2014

The culpa in contrahendo is a doctrine that "damages should be recoverable against the party whose blameworthy conduct during negotiations for a contract brought about its invalidity or prevented its perfection". In China, Chinese Civil law gradually adopted Culpa in Contrahendo under the former 'economic contract law' and the 'general rules of the civil law', then the legal system of culpa in contrahendo was formally established under Contract Law of the People's Republic of China(CLPRC) in 1999. To put it concretely, Art. 42, 43, 58 of the Chinese Civil Law expressly establishes a culpa in contrahendo liability derived from a principle of good faith governing pre-contractual negotiations. however, in general, culpa in contrahendo has been recognized a independent legal liability as distinct from contractual default liability and torts liability. This article provides a general description of the characteristics of culpa in contrahendo under Chinese Contract Law, and both theoretical issues that have arisen in Chinese academics and relevant important precedent in Chinese Courts. This article also analyzed trend of judgment on precedents that the Supreme Peoples's Court of the PRC applied culpa in contrahendo.

• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.22
• /
• pp.173-197
• /
• 2004

Letter of Credit between buyer and seller in International Trade Transaction is the means of payment which makes International Trade operate smoothly by guaranteeing an exporter against non-payment and an importer against non-delivery. Therefore, the parties to a sale apply UCP500 established by the International Chamber of Commerce, in accordance with principle of the freedom of contract among the parties concerned, to look to their own legal stability. However, we may recognize some cases to have been applied principle of faith and trust, one of the dominant principles of the civil law, by the Korean Supreme Court and other cases to have not been applied that principle by the Korean Supreme Court. The Court shall apply UCP500 strictly as long as the parties concerned adopt UCP500 in view of the legal stability. In other words, in case that the Court applies principle of faith and trust to the case related to L/C, this rule - principle of faith and trust - should apply to the subject matter which have not stipulated in UCP500 under certain restriction. We suggest keeping in mind points to korean companies as follows; First, the parties to a sale shall understand L/C basis transaction and principles related to L/C deeply. Second, the exporter shall prepare documents in compliance with L/C and fulfil his or her obligation according to UCP500 and L/C related to the contract. Third, as buyer or importer, when he or she receive the shipping documents with discrepancies from the notifying bank, he or she makes him or herself clear to all the parties concerned. Fourth, as bank, she shall examine all the documents according to UCP500 and L/C related to the contract, and if any document with discrepancies, the bank, by all means, shall approach applicant first, and then decide whether to pay the credit amount to beneficiary or not to.

• The Journal of the Korea Contents Association
• /
• v.21 no.3
• /
• pp.626-633
• /
• 2021

In the event of a housing sale guarantee accident, the Housing and Urban Guarantee Corporation shall be responsible for the guarantee by refunding the moving-in money unless there are special circumstances to the contractor. The Housing and Urban Guarantee Corporation may refuse to perform the refund based on the Terms and Conditions Regulations Act, but disputes continue to arise between interested parties in this regard. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to study the problems and improvement measures for legal issues related to the implementation of the refund. First, the issue of guarantee effectiveness and scope of guarantee under the Terms and Conditions Regulation Act. Second, the problem of guarantee contract for conditional third parties of Housing and Urban Guarantee Corporation. Third, the problem of the attitude of the existing precedents of the Supreme Court was examined. As a result of reviewing these legal issues, it was confirmed that the interpretation of terms and conditions according to the implementation of the refund is being interpreted in accordance with the principle of good faith, but according to individual cases, precedents can be divided into positive and negative judgments. In addition, despite the fact that the housing pre-sale guarantee is a guarantee contract for a conditional third party, it was confirmed that the buyer suffered damages in good faith through active disputes with the interested parties. Accordingly, the Housing and Urban Guarantee Corporation proposed an improvement plan for roles and cooperation items to meet the purpose of establishment for the stability of the customer's housing.