• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제23권3호
• /
• pp.1-23
• /
• 2013

Form requirements particularly for arbitration clauses are widely perceived as an obstacle for efficiently resolving disputes on an international level. The paper discusses the recent suggestion that the freedom of form principle under Art. 11 CISG extended to arbitration, forum selection, or choice of law clauses in international sales contracts and thus superseded any and all formal requirements in this regard. After analysing national and international form requirements with regard to said clauses, the authors elaborate that while dispute clauses are indeed encompassed by the CISG's scope of application, freedom of form under the CISG was neither intended to nor should it apply to dispute clauses. This result is further confirmed by the interplay of the CISG with other international conventions, first and foremost the 1958 New York Convention, as well as a careful analysis of the so called most-favourable-law-approach.

• 무역학회지
• /
• 제45권5호
• /
• pp.117-139
• /
• 2020

In case of international long-term transactions, there are various risks of economic change of circumstances including skyrocketing price increase and shortage of raw material, as well as force majeure in a general sense. Nevertheless, pretty many of international long-term commercial contracts do not include the provisions of renegotiation and adaptation of the contract. In this case, possibility of renegotiation and adaptation depends mainly on the applicable law. Namely, it may be possible or not, according to choice of law. The reason is that national laws have nuances each other, and most of national courts are traditionally reluctant to accept hardship. and also, provisions of international uniform law (CISG) has ambiguity and inflexibility in relation to the problems of change of circumstances. Accordingly, this paper analyzes comparatively the doctrines and provisions related to renegotiation and adaptation of contracts of the most representative countries such as England, U.S.A., France, Germany as well as provisions CISG and soft law such as PICC. By doing so, the author makes clear which laws of instruments is more flexible or acceptable in allowing renegotiation and adaptation of long-term commercial contracts, and emphasizes on the importance of inclusion of express terms by using other alternative supplementing clauses, as a best solution for settling the problems of legal uncertainty of contract in relation to renegotiation and adaptation.

• 무역학회지
• /
• 제44권6호
• /
• pp.1-21
• /
• 2019

In the case of a sea transport contract, the decision of the governing law, together with the choice of lex fori, shall be a legal issue in all legal disputes involving damage to the goods. In sea transport contracts, a paramount clause is often established in conjunction with the governing law clause, which can lead to conflict between these two clauses. Most B/L's back clauses contain a paramount clause that provides that the Hague Rules, Hague-Visby Rules, or foreign laws that prevail over other provisions of the terms. The Hague Rules and the Hague-Visby Rules, however, set different standards regarding the extent of the sea carrier's liability. Therefore, in the interpretation of ground conditions, it is an important question whether the Hague Rules or the Hague-Visby Rules are applied or whether each rule is applied as a law. For example, the paramount clause in the Superior Pescadores case was problematic in the interpretation of the term 'Hague Rules.' In this case, the English Court held that the expression 'Hague Rules' could be used to mean the Hague-Visby Rules, and not exclusively the Hague Rules. Therefore, the Hague-Visby Rules were applied in the judgment of this case, which suggests that this case can be a valuable precedent in future legal matters.

• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제54권
• /
• 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.

• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제25권
• /
• pp.165-187
• /
• 2005

Arbitration is a creature of contract. The parties agree that selective dispute resolution clause provides them with a choice to litigate or arbitrate certain disputes. Under the agreements, the parties had the option in the action. In the event any dispute arises between the parties concerning our representation or payment of our fees and disbursements which cannot be promptly resolved to our mutual satisfaction, you agree that dispute will be submitted to arbitration. Arbitration is a matter of contract and a party cannot be required to submit to arbitration any dispute which he has not agreed so to submit. The selective arbitration agreement has become an accepted method of dispute resolution. However, the trend of dispute settlement has changed. The selective arbitrations clauses are to be construed as broadly as possible, and arbitration will be compelled unless it may be said with positive assurance that arbitration clause is not susceptible of an interpretation that covers the asserted dispute.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제27권4호
• /
• pp.91-113
• /
• 2017

UN Convention on International Sale of Goods (CISG) and International Commercial Arbitration aim at the promotion and facilitation of international trade. Both of them share similar general principles; i.e., party autonomy and pacta sunt servanda. Also they are often applied concurrently in the case of the international commercial trade. The purpose of this article is to investigate whether the CISG could apply the formation of the arbitration clause that is included in the main contract governed by CISG. Sellers and buyers have freedom of designating choice of law that is applied to their contracts. An international arbitration agreement is presumed to be separable from the contract in which it is found. However, arbitration clauses commonly form part of a general contract. Thus, the CISG is intended to be applied to dispute resolution clauses, including arbitration clause even if it is not completely suitable. Notably, there is a fundamental distinction between the CISG and arbitration. The CISG abolished the formalities of contract. New York convention requires Contracting States' Courts to enforce written international agreements to arbitrate.

• 한국무역상무학회:학술대회논문집
• /
• 한국무역상무학회 2004년도 제32회 산학협동 세미나
• /
• pp.149-170
• /
• 2004

Arbitration is a creature of contract. The parties agree that selective dispute resolution clause provides them with a choice to litigate or arbitrate certain disputes. Under the agreements, the parties had the option in the action. In the event any dispute arises between the parties concerning our representation or payment of our fees and disbursements which cannot be promptly resolved to our mutual satisfaction, you agree that dispute will be submitted to arbitration. Arbitration is a matter of contract and a party cannot be required to submit to arbitration any dispute which he has not agreed so to submit. The selective arbitrations clauses are to be construed as broadly as possible, and arbitration will be compelled unless it may be said with positive assurance that arbitration clause is not susceptible of an interpretation that covers the asserted dispute.

• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제18권
• /
• pp.27-62
• /
• 2002

The international sale contract is the central contracts in export-import transactions. A good sale contract or set of general conditions of sale will cover all the principal elements of the transaction, so that uncertainties are avoided. The parties' respective duties as concern the payment mechanism, transport contract and insurance responsibilities, inter alia, will all be clearly detailed in the contract. The following key clauses should be included in international contracts of sale and general conditions of sale: ${\bullet}$ preamble ${\bullet}$ identification of parties ${\bullet}$ description of goods ${\bullet}$ price and payment conditions ${\bullet}$ delivery periods and conditions ${\bullet}$ inspection of the goods - obligations and limitations ${\bullet}$ quantity or quality variations in the products delivered ${\bullet}$ reservation of title and passing of property rights ${\bullet}$ transfer of risk - how accomplished ${\bullet}$ seller's warranties and buyer's complaints ${\bullet}$ assignment of rights ${\bullet}$ force majeure clause and hardship clause ${\bullet}$ requirement that amendments and modifications be in writing ${\bullet}$ choice of law ${\bullet}$ choice of dispute resolution mechanism Under most systems of law, a party can be excused from a failure to perform a contract obligation which is caused by the intervention of a totally unforeseeable event, such as the outbreak of war, or an act of God such as an earthquake or hurricane. Under the American commercial code (UCC) the standard for this relief is one of commercial impracticability. In contrast, many civil law jurisdictions apply the term force majeure to this problem. Under CISG, the standard is based on the concept of impediments to performance. Because of the differences between these standards, parties might be well advised to draft their own force majeure, hardship, or excusable delays clause. The ICC publication, "Force Majeure and Hardship" provides a sample force majeure clause which can be incorporated by reference, as well as a hardship clause which must be expressly integrated in the contract. In addition, the ICC Model provides a similar, somewhat more concise formulation of a force majeure clause. When the seller wishes to devise his own excusable delays clause, he will seek to anticipate in its provision such potential difficulties as those related to obtaining government authorisations, changes in customs duties or regulations, drastic fluctuations in labour, materials, energy, or transportation prices, etc.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제18권2호
• /
• pp.79-102
• /
• 2008

When several parties are involved in a dispute, it is usually considered desirable that the issues should be dealt with in the same proceedings, rather than in a series of separate proceedings. This saves time and money. It avoids the possibility of conflicting decisions on the same issues of law and fact, since all issues are determined by the same tribunal at the same time. Where there is a multi-party arbitration, it may be because there are several parties to one contract, or it may be because there are several contracts with different parties that have a bearing on the matters in dispute. In international trade and commerce, for individuals, corporations or state agencies to join together in a joint venture or consortium or in some other legal relationship of this kind, in order to enter into a contract with another party or parties, where such a contract contains an arbitration clause and a dispute arises, the members of the consortium or joint venture may decided that they would each like to appoint an arbitrator. A different problem arises where there are several contracts with different parties, each of which has a bearing on the issues in dispute. A major international construction project is likely to involve not only the employer and the main contractor, but also a host of special suppliers and sub-contractors. Each of them will be operating under different contracts often with different choice of law and arbitration clauses. The appointment of the arbitrator or the composition of the arbitral tribunal should be in accordance with the agreement of the parties. The parties have to be equally treated in the constituting of the arbitral tribunal and the arbitral proceedings. However, the right of the parties to nominate a member of the arbitral tribunal could be taken away from them, if they are subject to the restrictions by means of the law of the country where the arbitration is taking place. That is, multiple parties jointly should nominate one arbitrator, where there they have to exercise their substantive right in common, or one of them exert his substantive right, then it has an effect on another parties, or they, whether as claimant or as respondent, get the same or similar treatment in the arbitral procedure. Therefore it is necessary to intend to settle multi-party disputes quickly and efficiently.

• 한국산림과학회지
• /
• 제96권3호
• /
• pp.269-282
• /
• 2007

본 연구의 목적은 당시 당면한 산림문제를 해결하기 위하여 1972년 7월부터 1973년 6월까지 진행되었던 산림정책의 변화과정과 그 원인을 구명하는 데 있다. 1972년에 우리나라가 당면한 산림문제는 1ha 당 평균 입목축적 $11m^3$, 총 산림면적의 약 12%에 해당하는 82만ha의 무립목지로 대표되는 산림황폐화였다. 당시 이 문제를 해결하기 위한 다양한 접근방법이 있을 수 있었다. 1972년 12월 산림개발법이 제정될 때까지는 산림경영 측면에서 조림을 유도하는 경영중심 임정이 유력하였다. 그러나 1973년 3월까지 큰 변화가 있었다. 우선 산림녹화의 효율적인 수행을 위하여 산림청을 농림부에서 내무부로 이관하였다. 뒤 이어 국가가 산림녹화의 주체가 되어 국가 재정과 경찰력을 포함한 행정력을 동원하여 신속히 100만ha를 조림한다는 제1차 치산녹화10년계획이 수립되었다. 영림공사가 수행할 특수개발지역의 산림조차 국가와 지방 정부가 중심이 되어 조림을 한다는 정책이 선택됨으로써 영림공사의 필요성은 퇴색되었다. 더군다나 정부는 법으로 정한 영림공사 설립에 필요한 출자금 200억원을 조달하는 데 '재정적 제약'이 있었다. 결국 공적 기관인 영림공사가 특수개발지역의 산림을 경영한다는 계획은 1973년 3월 5일 산림개발법이 개정되어 영림공사 설립 조항이 삭제되면서 그 막을 내렸다. 이러한 변화의 중심엔 당시 산림문제를 단기간 내에 해결하려는 박정희 대통령의 '시간적 제약' 인식이 크게 자리 잡고 있었다. 이런 대통령의 인식은 영림공사 주도의 조림정책보다 행정력 주도의 제1차 치산녹화10년계획을 선택하게 만든 보이지 않는 변수였다.