• Title/Summary/Keyword: 중재재판

Search Result 24, Processing Time 0.02 seconds

Domestic Legislative Problems on the Civil Liability of Air Carrier in Korea Focus on the Example of Every Countries' Legislation (한국(韓國)에 있어서 항공안전인(航空運送人)의 민사책임(民事責任)에 관한 국내입법(國內立法)의 제문제(諸問題) ${\sim}$각국(各國)의 입법례(立法例)를 중심(中心)으로 하여${\sim}$)

  • Kim, Doo-Hwan
    • The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy
    • /
    • v.19 no.2
    • /
    • pp.9-53
    • /
    • 2004
  • This paper described the contents of theme entitled "Domestic Legislative Problems on the Civil Liability of Air Carrier in Korea" including the current example of fourteen countries' legislation ((1) Great Britain, (2) United States of America, (3) Canada, (4)European Union), (5) Germany, (6) France, (7) Italy, (8) Spain, (9) Swiss, (10) Australia, (11) Japan, (12) People's Republic of China, (13) Taiwan, (14) North Korea) relating to the aviation law or air transport law. Though the Korean and Japanese aviation act has provided only the public items such as (1) registration of aircraft, (2) persons engaged in aviation, (3) operation of aircraft, (4) aviation facilities including airport, (5) air transport business, (6) investigate of aircraft accidents etc., but they could not regulated the private items such as the legal relations of the air transport contract (1) air passenger ticket, (2) air luggage ticket, (3) airway bill, (4) liability of air carrier, (5) amount of compensation for damage caused by aircraft accidents, (6)jurisdiction, (7) arbitration, (8) limitation of action, (9) combined carriage, (10) carriage by air performed by an actual carrier other than contracting carrier, damage caused by aircraft to the third parties etc. in their aviation act until now. In order to solve speedily the legal problems on the limitation of air carrier's liability and long law suit and disputes between wrongdoers and survivors etc, it is necessary and desirable for us to enact a new "Draft for the Air Transport Act" including the abovementioned private items. I would like to propose personally and strongly the legislation of "Draft for the Air Transport Act" in Korea in emphasizing the importance of ensuring protection of the interests of consumers air passengers and shippers in carriage by air and the need for equitable compensation between air carriers and survivors caused by the aircraft accidents such as the German Air Transport Act (Luftverkerhrsgesetz).

  • PDF

A Study on the Resolution of Trade Disputes by Mediation (조정에 의한 무역분쟁의 해결방안 고찰)

  • Jang, Eun-Hee;Hwang, Ji-Hyeon
    • 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.

Study on Trends and Characteristics of Infringement the Right to Likeness by the Press (언론보도에 의한 초상권 침해 소송의 경향과 특성)

  • Dong, Seho;Kim, Sungyong;Ahn, Horim
    • The Journal of the Korea Contents Association
    • /
    • v.16 no.1
    • /
    • pp.370-381
    • /
    • 2016
  • This study was designed to examine the Trends and Characteristics of Infringement of right to likeness by the Press in Korea. We did an analysis of 81 cases of the court's rulings related to Infringement of right to likeness by the Press from 1990 to 2014. As a result, it shows that the first court's ruling of portrait rights violations by the press was made in 1990. The results showed that there were the increasing number of disputing cases over Infringement of right to likeness against Broadcasting media in the 2000s compared to monthly magazines in the 1990s, which were regarded as gonzo journalism. Since the 2000s, 71% of lawsuits regarding Infringement of right to likeness has been against the Broadcasting Media due to increasing the influence of the broadcasting and possibility of Infringement of right to likeness by visual images. Especially, the number of lawsuits on infringement of rights to likeness has increased rapidly by the Broadcasting Media. Only 23 cases(28.4%) of total 81 cases were decided in favor of the press. the press shows the low success in disputing the rights of likeness. this study shows the korean courts put more weight on the right to likeness and the breaking a balance between freedom of the press and right of person's character. However, 52.9% of the cases was decided in favor of The press against the plaintiff of public figures compared to 22% against the public. It can be difficult for public figures to win lawsuit against the press causing the Infringement of right to likeness. Judging from this fact, it seemed that the court recognized media watchdog for public figures.

A Study on the Meaning of Outer Space Treaty in International Law (우주조약의 국제법적 의미에 관한 연구)

  • Kim, Han-Taek
    • The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy
    • /
    • v.28 no.2
    • /
    • pp.223-258
    • /
    • 2013
  • 1967 Outer Space Treaty(Treaty on Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and Use of Outer Space, including the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies; OST) is a treaty that forms the basis of international space law. OST is based on the 1963 Declaration of Legal Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and Use of Outer Space announced by UNGA resolution. As of May 2013, 102 countries are states parties to OST, while another 27 have signed the treaty but have not completed ratification. OST explicitly claimed that the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies are the province of all mankind. Art. II of OST states that "outer space, including the Moon and other celestial bodies, is not subject to national appropriation by claim of sovereignty, by means of use or occupation, or by any other means", thereby establishing res extra commercium in outer space like high seas. However 1979 Moon Agreement stipulates that "the moon and its natural resources are the Common Heritage of Mankind(CHM)." Because of the number of the parties to the Moon Agreement(13 parties) it does not affect OST. OST also established its specific treaties as a complementary means such as 1968 Rescue Agreement, 1972 Liability Convention, 1975 Registration Convention. OST bars states party to the treaty from placing nuclear weapons or any other weapons of mass destruction in orbit of Earth, installing them on the Moon or any other celestial body, or to otherwise station them in outer space. It exclusively limits the use of the Moon and other celestial bodies to peaceful purposes and expressly prohibits their use for testing weapons of any kind, conducting military maneuvers, or establishing military bases, installations, and fortifications. However OST does not prohibit the placement of conventional weapons in orbit. China and Russia submitted Draft Treaty on the Prevention of the Placement of Weapon in Outer Space and of the Threat or Use of Force against Outer Space Objects(PPWT) on the Conference on Disarmament in 2008. USA disregarded PPWT on the ground that there are no arms race in outer space. OST does not have some articles in relation to current problems such as space debris, mechanisms of the settlement of dispute arising from state activities in outer space in specific way. COPUOS established "UN Space Debris Mitigation Guidelines" based on "IADC Space Debris Mitigation Guidelines" and ILA proposed "International Instrument on the Protection of the Environment from Damage Caused by Space Debris" for space debris problems and Permanent Court of Arbitration(PCA) established "Optional Rules for Arbitration of Disputes Relating to Outer Space Activities" and ILA proposed "1998 Taipei Draft Convention on the Settlement of Space Law Dispute" for the settlement of dispute problems. Although OST has shortcomings in some articles, it is very meaningful in international law in considering the establishment of basic principles governing the activities of States in the exploration and use of outer space, including the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies. OST established the principles governing the activities of states in the exploration and use of outer space as customary law and jus cogens in international law as follows; the exploration and use of outer space shall be carried out for the benefit and in the interests of all countries and shall be the province of all mankind; outer space shall be free for exploration and use by all States; outer space is not subject to national appropriation by claim of sovereignty, by means of use or occupation, or by any other means. The principles of global public interest in outer space imposes international obligations erga omnes applicable to all States. This principles find significant support in legal norms dealing with following points: space activities as the "province of all mankind"; obligation to cooperate; astronauts as envoys of mankind; avoidance of harmful contamination; space activities by States, private entities and intergovernmental organisations; absolute liability for damage cauesd by certain space objects; prohibition of weapons in space and militarization of the celestial bodies; duty of openness and transparency; universal application of the international space regime.

  • PDF