• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제42권
• /
• pp.211-245
• /
• 2009

In this paper we firstly review the developmental stages of the Chinese civil aviation industry since 1949 and the background history of the Chinese Civil Aviation Law of 1996. We secondly analyzed the main terms and conditions about the Chinese civil aviation law and pointed out several problematic issues in view of the development of the Chinese aviation industry. Current civil aviation law in China has been in effect for the last 12 years. In these periods, Chinese civil aviation industry has developed in a high speed and great changes have occurred in its market environments. Thus, some of the terms and conditions in current civil aviation law in China have become outdated and unsuitable for the current developmental stage of the Chinese civil aviation industry. Therefore, we proposed some directions of the future amending of the Chinese Civil Aviation Law.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제22권3호
• /
• pp.25-46
• /
• 2012

China instituted arbitration law on September 1, 1995, after having legislated the law under the UNCITRAL Model Law. However, Chinese arbitration law has some problems related to the effectiveness of its arbitration agreement, unlike the UNCITRAL Model Law. Thus, parties in dispute who want to settle a dispute based on Chinese arbitration law as governing law have more to take into consideration because there could be serious problems related to the effectiveness of the arbitration agreement. Therefore, this paper attempted to analyze the classification of jurisdiction related to the authorization of effectiveness in arbitration agreement of arbitral organization and Chinese, verify the problems, and suggest the solutions. Moreover, the author tried to verify the problems in applying the law related to the authorization of effectiveness in Chinese arbitration agreements and suggest some improvements. This paper also suggests improvements and problems related to the selection of arbitral organizations among several conditions for effective arbitration agreement in Chinese arbitration law. Finally, the author suggests some cautions and countermeasures related to arbitrations agreement for domestic investors and traders dealing with the Chinese.

• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제66권
• /
• pp.119-148
• /
• 2015

Generally, the liability for breach is defined as the civil liability that arises from the conduct of violation of a contract. There are two notable principles governing liability for breach that have fundamental impacts on the unified Contract Law of the People's Republic of China (hereinafter Chinese Contract Law) in the remedies. In China, during the drafting of the Contract Law, there was a great debate as to whether damages for breach of contract ought to follow the fault principle or to follow the strict liability principle. Ultimately the Chinese Contract Law follows the model of the CISG on this point, namely, it follows the strict liability principle (article 107) with an exemption cause of force majeure. Under Chinese Contract Law, it is interpreted as strict liability in principle. Strict Liability is a notion introduced into Chinese Contract Law from the Anglo-Saxon Law. The strict liability or no fault doctrine, on the contrary, allows a party to claim damages if the other party fails to fulfill his contractual obligations regardless of the fault of the failing party. Pursuant to the strict liability doctrine, if the performance of a contract is due, any non-performance will constitute a breach and the fault on the party in breach is irrelevant. This paper reviews problems of legal character or legal ground of contractual liability in Chinese contract law. Specifically, focusing on the interpretation of Chinese contract law sections and analysis of three cases related contractual liability in freight agency, the paper proposes some implications of structural features of Chinese contract law and international commercial transactions.

• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제63권
• /
• 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.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제31권4호
• /
• pp.29-49
• /
• 2021

The Chinese Arbitration Law came into force in 1995 and has been implemented for 26 years. As a party to the New York Convention, there are many contradictions and conflicts between the Chinese Arbitration Law and the New York Convention on the issue of ad hoc arbitration, and this institutional disconnection can bring about problems such as misalignment of arbitration powers. On July 30, 2021, China's Ministry of Justice published a draft of the revised Arbitration Law for public consultation, and the draft has generated a lively debate among the public. This article explores the reasonable and inadequate points of the draft of Arbitration Law in light of the recent trends in the use of commercial arbitration in China, the COVID-19, the Free Trade Zone, and the relationship between the Civil Code and the Arbitration Law.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제25권2호
• /
• pp.49-70
• /
• 2015

There are three categories of arbitration - domestic arbitration, foreign-related arbitration and foreign arbitration. Although the meaning of foreign arbitration and International Commercial Arbitration is different, they are used to mean the same in practice. In fact, there is significant controversy about the meaning of non-domestic arbitration because it is too difficult to distinguish between non-domestic arbitration and domestic arbitration. In the Chinese arbitration system, there are two main laws,Chinese Arbitration Law and Chinese Civil Procedure Law. Chinese Arbitration Law regulates the internal matters, while Chinese Civil Procedure Law regulates the external legal regulations. After the 2012 revised Chinese Civil Procedure Law, a number of laws and regulations have been revised, and almost every Arbitrations Rules have been revised, and will be in effect in 2015. Depending on the nationality of arbitration, the applicable laws will be different. The nationality of arbitration is so important that this paper will pay more attention to it. Although the case in China has no precedent effect, it is so important to the parties that this paper will address it. This paper will analyze the process and the cases of the recognition and enforcement of the award system in China.

• 한국항해학회지
• /
• 제21권3호
• /
• pp.39-47
• /
• 1997

Under Chinese law system, the maritime law is a special branch of the civil law. For this reason, the maritime litigation shall be governed correspondently by the civil prodecure law. However, since the maritime litigation has its own special prodecure which is different from that of general procedure, there must be some special regulations to be a supplement to the civil procedure law. In this paper, a study is made on such regulations which are "The Regulations Relating to the arrest of Ships Before Litigation" and "The Regulations Concerning the Auction of Ships Which Have Been Arrested by Maritime Court for Clearing off the Debts" The aim of this paper is to describe the basic principles established in the regulations mentioned above in order to make the people who are unfamiliar with Chinese maritime legislation to be understood about Chinese special procedure adopted in maritime litigation.maritime litigation.

• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제67권
• /
• pp.49-68
• /
• 2015

In recent years in China, corresponding to a shift in consumption pattern from household basics to greater expenditure on quality of life, new franchising opportunities arise. Although the franchising prospect in China is promising, Korean companies aiming at franchising into China need to be aware of the legal framework for commercial franchise in China as this will have direct impact on their business expansion. Where franchising activities involve trade mark licence, Chinese Franchise Regulations require such trade mark licence agreement to be regulated in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Chinese Trademark Law. Furthermore where one party fails to perform his obligation and it impacts purpose of the contract seriously, the other party could avoid the contract in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Chinese Contract Law. To launch franchising business successfully in China, Korean companies do market research sufficiently before they may commence franchise business. Korean franchisor must register with local authorities in China by own name, and make Chinese partner take charge of management of the distribution network and invitation of franchisee partners.

• 무역학회지
• /
• 제41권1호
• /
• pp.21-39
• /
• 2016

본 연구는 중국에서 점점 이슈가 되고 있는 병행수입 시스템의 법적 문제를 분석하였다. 현재 중국에는 병행수입에 대한 법률이 없으므로 중국 법원은 병행수입 사건을 판결할 때 원고의 소송 청구에 따라서 「전리법(專利法)」, 「상표법(商標法)」, 「반부정당경쟁법(反不正當競爭法)」 등 여러 법률에 의해서 다르게 판결하고 있다. 따라서 동일한 사례임에도 불구하고 법관과 적용 법률에 따라서 다른 결론이 나고 있다는 것이 문제로 지적된다. 본 연구에서는 병행수입의 개념과 이론적 근거를 살펴보고, 중국의 대표적인 3개 사례를 통해서 중국법원이 병행수입 판결에 대한 시사점을 파악하고, 입법 필요성을 제시하였다.

• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제54권
• /
• pp.167-190
• /
• 2012

The purpose of this study is to find out some countermeasure to Korean companies entered Chinese market through analyzing an arbitration case resolved by CIETAC applied of Chinese Commission Agency Law and CISG. China create legal relationship between the principal and the third party under Chinese Consignment Contract Law. Korean companies so make sure whether this Contract is included when they conclude international commercial contract. If yes, they have to prove their recognition for the relationship between the principal and the commission agent when needed. If the parties agreed an additional period of time of delivery and the seller do not deliver the goods within this period, this breach might be regarded as fundamental nature and the buyer could declare the contract avoided. In addition, late delivery might also be regarded as fundamental breach when market price is fluctuated. It is understandable that attorney's fees is recoverable one, but it is not understandable that arbitrator's extra expenses such as travel and accommodation expenses is not recoverable with the reason that arbitrator comes outside of the country.