• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제29권3호
• /
• pp.75-97
• /
• 2019

The growing importance of biological resources as sovereign rights to healthcare, energy, and food has sparked international discussions on Genetic Resources (GRs) and Traditional Knowledge (TK). As the bio-industry continues to grow, research and development utilizing patented biological resources are advocated. Currently, World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) is actively discussing GRs and TK, and an effective response to national interest has been sought. Of late, there have been growing disputes over issues like ownership, control, and access and benefit-sharing between indigenous peoples and users of GRs and TK resources. Resolution of disputes concerning GRs and TK are thus becoming critical not only to stakeholders such as the indigenous peoples and corporations, but also to third-party users. Due to the weakness of the current IP and court system however, such disputes are not addressed adequately. This paper will address the use of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR), which is an out-of-court dispute resolution system, on conflicting issues regarding GRs and TK. It will consider the WIPO as a forum for ADR and ADR for GRs and TK disputes and it will seek both parties in the dispute to benefit from the use of the ADR process.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제32권3호
• /
• pp.93-109
• /
• 2022

Cosmetics are products that consumers use every day to maintain or improve the health of their skin and hair. Therefore, the expansion of the cosmetics market leads to the expansion of disputes over cosmetic damage. Along with constant social changes, new conflicts continue to arise. In order to resolve these disputes, various consumer dispute resolution organizations and methods are required. Therefore, Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR), an alternative method that can provide a reasonable judgment on problems that occur during the manufacture and distribution of cosmetics with expert knowledge of the industry, is required. Korea resolves disputes between consumers and manufacturers caused by cosmetics through the ADR of the Korea Cosmetics Association and the Korea Consumer Agency. It handles disputes related to accidents caused by cosmetics, offers consultation on consumer complaints on cosmetics and provides information on accidents and safety related to cosmetics. It is not possible to completely eradicate disputes from cosmetic damages. Therefore, it is necessary to expand and efficiently operate the cosmetic ADR system for consumers. In this study, the current status of cosmetic damage disputes and damage relief and the role of the domestic ADR system were reviewed. Consumers should be easily relieved from damage caused by cosmetics. By accumulating important precedents with an efficient cosmetic damage dispute resolution system, disputes over cosmetic damage should be smoothly resolved.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제12권1호
• /
• pp.171-205
• /
• 2002

ADR (Alternative Dispute Resolution) is a system to settle disputes without having to pursue a judgment through the courts; it provides an alternative to conventional judicial proceedings. As such, ADR is available to resolve a wide range of disputes, ranging from minor disagreements between neighbors to contracts involving millions of dollars. One can say there has been “efficient resolution of a dispute” only when it has been settled rapidly and finally to the satisfaction of all parties concerned, inexpensively and in a transparent manner. In this respect, ADR may well be regarded as the most efficient method to resolve disputes. In order to establish and disseminate ADR as a practical dispute-settlement procedure, first, governmental financial support is necessary, rather than having to depend upon fees collected from the disputing parties. At the same time, various inducement policies also are required. The most important factor is to make people aware of the fact that ADR is a low-cost, speedy system and more practical compared with other procedures. Second, cooperation from legal circles, lawyers in particular, is absolutely necessary. If disputes become serious, the general public normally seeks out lawyers for advice. Third, disputing parties have to be convinced of the benefits of ADR, secure in the knowledge that ADR will provide them not only with economic benefit but also a satisfactory result. Diverse ADR procedures should be developed and implemented to facilitate participation in a comfortable atmosphere with a mutually friendly relationship. The most important factor in achieving the wider use of ADR, which is attracting more attention of late, is the expectation that it will bring a satisfactory resolution to the related parties in dispute. The trend of seeking a new dispute-settlement method also reflects the changing sense of values in society today. Therefore, one specific method is not suitable for all kinds of disputes. A proper system should offer different approaches according to the pattern and type of dispute and the parties concerned. In selecting a dispute-resolution system, several factors have to be considered - the relationship between the parties, their financial situations, the necessity of maintaining confidentiality, urgency for settlement, etc. In the light of all these, it is desirable for the disputing parties to select the most appropriate of the available systems, not blindly turning to the courts, if and when a dispute arises.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제13권2호
• /
• pp.425-457
• /
• 2004

This study is to approach e-Trade issues and how to settle the dispute for e-Trade according to on-line Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) process. Most on-line systems operate on a limited access basis. The increasing use of the internet to do business brings to light at least important concerns to persons who engage in commerce on-line, or e-Trade. There is some concern about the limits of current internet technology to guarantee the security of e-Trade. The new technology has transformed society and is defining new years of doing business. This revolution in technology has even changed the nature of many of the goods and services that are the subjects of e-Trade. There is also concern about the limits of the legal framework to guarantee the enforcement of e-Trade. A significant issue is how the law should be adapted to reflect business practices regarding such cyberspace agreements as Web site click-on agreements, e-data interchange, and on-line sales. The principal benefits of on-line ADR should typically be faster and less expensive than traditional conciliation arbitration. The on-line ADR system has the several significances, decreasing inappropriate cost as time and burden of ADR, providing an approachable measure of relief and more efficient tool for the settle of dispute. Therefore, on-line ADR could be used as an adjunct resolution process in large class actions where each single claim is small, but varies somewhat, thus requiring some individual fact determination.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제25권1호
• /
• pp.3-23
• /
• 2015

As the Internet rapidly emerges as a speedy and cost-effective way of purchasing goods from overseas websites, the number of disputes arising out of overseas direct purchases also increases. In such situations, a disgruntled consumer might be left without an effective remedy. Providing an alternative approach to redress such grievances might assist in resolving such disputes and in increasing consumer confidence in e-commerce. Online Dispute Resolution (ODR) will allow consumers to solve their disputes without going to court, in a quick, low-cost, and simple way. It also helps to eliminate complex jurisdictional and choice-of-law problems. On the other hand, it has many problems such as having inadequate confidentiality and security, not being able to meet the "writing" requirement for arbitration of disputes, having difficulty in enforcing online arbitration agreements, having difficulties in enforcing online decisions and so on. This article investigates relationship online disputes and ODR and suggests ways that ODR can work best in resolving disputes arising out of overseas direct purchases. To expand the ODR system in online disputes, it is very important for domestic consumers to recognize the concept and usefulness of the Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) and ODR systems. The Korean government must also help consumers recognize the ADR mechanisms of dispute resolution by public campaign advertisement of ADR systems. Further education of dispute resolution in higher educational institutions is also required as well as assisting the KCAB with funds and the establishment of ADR Law.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제13권2호
• /
• pp.181-209
• /
• 2004

This Study is divided into 5 separate Parts and an Abstract. Part Ⅰ, Ⅱ consist mostly of a collection of problems, current status, motives and the future of ADR. In Pert Ⅲ was described ADR as policies of judicial settlements. We must accept that a diversity of legal culture will always continue to exist. Accordingly we must learn to accommodate those differences of 'culture' around us and to harmonize conflicting laws. This recognition of our reality should in no way be confused with pessimism. In fact if one accepts this perspective of the world ,the study of law seems enriched and becomes academically more challenging. Recently, in the United States, interest in alternative settlement mechanism has increased greatly, which leads me to wonder why such a phenomenon has taken place. In the first place, I'm amazed at the extent to which conciliation or mediation-or the new word, I guess, is alternative dispute resolution, which by now has its own acronym, "A.D.R,"-have gained attention here recently. When 35 years ago, there was virtually no interest in conciliation in this country at the time. What interest there was, was no in the law schools. But looking at the situation now, we have a spate of publications on the subject; we have organizations that are established for no other reason than to promote alternative dispute settlement. We have courses in the law schools. The American Association of Law Schools and the American Bar Association also have active programs. So we have to ask ourselves why. The difference between now and 35 years are striking. On the other hand, I think the interest of the public in ADR has probably been greatly enhanced by the politics of the so-called "poverty programs." I think that many of these assistance programs for the poor-and I do think the "poor" have become a rather expansive political movement beyond simply taking care of the most marginal people of society-have generated money to explore this kind of dispute resolution.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제23권2호
• /
• pp.165-190
• /
• 2013

As intellectual property rights are perceived as the key element of creating added values and securing competitiveness, the result of intellectual property rights disputes play an important role in the success of companies. As seen from above strong points of an Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) system in Chapter III, intellectual property rights disputes increasingly tend to be resolved by ADR rather than litigation. Discussions about and operation of ADR are already being actively carried out in many countries, and major ADR institutions have been acquiring experience in a variety of intellectual property rights disputes. To enhance the use and recognition of ADR as the way of resolving the Intellectual Property Rights disputes in Korea, this study suggested the following three ways. First, domestic ADR institutions, the Korean Commercial Arbitration Board (KCAB) will need to establish cooperative systems with prominent overseas institutions to lead the disputing parties to fair resolutions as well as to instill trust in international arbitration institutions. Second, they will need to contribute to the promotion of arbitration systems throughout society by developing and applying a variety of arbitration systems as well as securing a pool of professionals. Finally, the arbitration rules will need to be continuously improved to deal with disputes promptly and reinforce privacy protection.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제20권3호
• /
• pp.121-145
• /
• 2010

In the past, ADR has not been used as frequently in Japan as it has in other parts of the industrialized world. However, though litigation is still the most utilized vehicle of dispute resolution by Japanese financial institutions, this will be changing. The New Financial ADR system, which was created by a June 2009 amendment to the Financial Instruments and Exchange Act, is meant to deal with every stage of financial-related disputes and, as such, strives to resolve disputes before they become significant and acts to ameliorate any post-ADR issues that may remain, thereby completing the FIEA's purpose to protect investors. Since the foundation of the New Financial ADR system applies to all related industries, new provisions were set out in 16 business related acts, such as the Banking Act, the Insurance Business Act, and FIEA itself. October 2010 will mark the formal introduction of a new system of financial ADR in Japan. New Financial ADR in Japan will be modeled on the Financial Ombudsman Service in the United Kingdom, but will not feature one comprehensive dispute resolution system in which one dispute resolution institution covers all disputes in the financial field. The New Financial ADR system is merely one step towards a foundation of comprehensive financial ADR such as FOS. It must be noted, however, that this all important first step was over seven years in the making, involving a great deal of discussion, debate, and compromise amongst many parts of Japanese government, business, and society. The New Financial ADR system grants participating parties the ability to stop the clock on any statute of limitations which may correspond to any future possible court cases related to the dispute,13 and further grants the ability to suspend related court proceedings while the parties are utilizing the New Financial ADR system. In addition, where financial institutions have not accepted dispute resolution proceedings or have not accepted a special conciliation proposal, the Ministry of Finance may issue an order compelling compliance if it is found that certain actions are necessary to ensure the appropriate operations of a financial institution's business. In Japan, as best practices have not yet been created.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제16권2호
• /
• pp.183-211
• /
• 2006

DDA and FTA make global business environments more competitive. These environments require Korean firms to face an unlimited competition and to resolve their dispute by ADR(Alternative Dispute Resolution). Thus, Korean Companies should be more concerned with ADR system and should utilize ADR to settle their dispute effectively and efficiently. However, ADR and KCAB isn't well recognized in Korea. So, the major purposes of this study are to expand the recognition of ADR and KCAB through SWOT Analysis of KCAB in Korea. Based on the results of my study, I suggest KCAB the following guidelines. First, KCAB work closely with the concerned research association as KSSA to make a guideline books of efficient dispute resolution. Second, KCAB improves their service quality and tries to utilizes various opportunity factors well. Meanwhile, Korean government assists KCAB with funds as well as improvement of dispute resolution system as the establishment of ADR Law. Consequently, to expand ADR in Korea, revolution of KCAB Staffs' consciousness and Korean government's assistance are very needed.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제29권2호
• /
• pp.201-223
• /
• 2019

There are diverse kinds of alternative dispute resolution systems in India. In the structure of society in Ancient India, the panchayat system was the creation of the villagers themselves and was composed of persons who were generally respected and to whose decisions the villagers were accustomed to give unreserved obedience. The ruler of the province allowed the villagers to govern themselves and the villagers assumed the responsibility for the settlement of disputes among themselves. However, the panchayat system has been heavily influenced by the structure of the village at hand, which depends on the caste system in India. This study categorizes the village dispute resolution structure into four main types depending on the extent of the caste group's dominance within the village. In addition, the Indian government created Lok Adalat which combines the indigenous dispute resolution with modern law system. Today, Lok Adalat is one of the widely used dispute resolution systems in India.