• International Commerce and Information Review
• /
• v.18 no.4
• /
• pp.221-262
• /
• 2016

This study examines the dispute resolution culture and negotiation strategy in Vietnam. We adopt area studies methodology in order to analyze dispute resolution and negotiation strategy in Vietnam, since the dispute resolution and negotiation strategy are keenly connected with the culture, law, institution, and economic system of the society. Our findings are as follows. First, Vietnamese society has the culture that has the characteristics of maternal society and patrilineal society. Vietnamese women has traditionally participated in the economic activity. Second, Vietnamese people showed loyalty to the nation. Third, Vietnamese society is shown to belong to the culture of collectivism. In addition, we investigate the multi-faced characteristics of Vietnamese dispute resolution culture and negotiation strategy. Our findings are as follows. First, Vietnamese people utilize middlemen in implementing dispute resolution and negotiation. Second, Vietnamese people prefer long-term negotiation style. Third, Vietnamese people is accustomed to face-saving culture. Fourth, Vietnamese people prefer the indirect communication style. Fifth, Vietnamese people prefer written document instead of oral agreement in contract. Sixth, Vietnamese people and firms prefer ADR to formal law.

• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.30 no.1
• /
• pp.139-160
• /
• 2020

Shalish is a key ingredient of the dispute resolution culture in Bangladesh since a formal court system has been known to show inefficiencies, such as overburdened cases and litigation process delays. This paper investigates the main function of Shalish and examines the evolution of Shalish in the perspectives of its three variants: a community-based Shalish, a village court, and an NGO variant of Shalish in modern extensions. It was found that traditional Shalish may play a role in the dispute resolution system in modern villages. A village court is a kind of hybrid dispute resolution system combining an informal dispute resolution with a formal court system. A village court is administered by the Union Parishad without intervention from the central government. Both the Shalish and village court have the weakness of unfair verdict exercised by local elders within a community. For this reason, an NGO variant Shalish is to reflect voices of women and other lower people in the community. To this study's interpretation, a village court is a new kind of Shalish combined with a formal court system while an NGO variant Shalish is also a "new" Shalish combined with a mediation system. In this respect, core elements of Shalish tradition have not been changed although various forms of new dispute resolution systems have emerged in the modern world.

• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.29 no.2
• /
• 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.

• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.13 no.2
• /
• 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.

• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.32 no.2
• /
• pp.135-157
• /
• 2022

Religion has a very close relationship with our everyday lives. In particular, religion maintains an absolute and ultimate value system and is deeply associated with all sectors of society such as politics, economy, thought, arts, culture, and science. The original meaning of religion in Buddhism means the teachings that become fundamentals. There are numerous religions around the world, and each religion has its own object of faith, different system, and unique rites and lifestyles. Therefore, evaluating or denouncing other regions based on the doctrines or conventions of a specific religion can lead to conflicts and disputes. The Buddhist Vinaya Pitaka related to alternative dispute resolution (ADR) is a method regarding the operation of a community. Vinaya Pitaka contains Buddha's teachings about individual and organizational ethics and on community life and activities. It is the Buddhist dispute resolution (BDR) of the Vinayata Pitaka that contains knowledge on howto remedy disputes among the four types of disputes that can occur. Vinaya Pitaka contains the principles and systems of BDR, and it is sufficient background for succeeding in the development of harmony today. The messages of laws, ethics, and Buddhist teachings are clear in these characteristics. The systems, progress, and procedures for various rites, events, and disputes as well as for everyday life, etc. display a rational operating system through karma. In particular, when disputes occur, the cause of the dispute is resolved as much as possible through transparent fairness and being unanimous using the seven remedies for disputes. Buddhist priests pursue private autonomy of ADR through karma, repentance, acceptance, etc. to maintain and continue the integrated functions of Buddhist priest harmony.

• Journal of Distribution Research
• /
• v.1 no.2
• /
• pp.53-84
• /
• 1996

This paper is to develop a conceptual framework regarding the choice among dispute-resolution mechanisms in channels of distribution. These mechanisms are characterized by the division of labor in resolving disputes. The choice of the mechanism depends on dispute environments. These environments concern culture and stratification. Six propositions are addressed with respect to how the environments affect the choice of the mechanism.

• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.8 no.1
• /
• pp.55-85
• /
• 1998

Each of China, Taiwan, Japan and Korea is in international trade one of the major countries in Asia and has been influenced by the Chinese character culture and the Civil law system. All these countries have their own commercial dispute resolution system for international trade dispute and commercial arbitration mechanism in their countries. They are making their own effort to internationalize and improve their commercial arbitration system. Among these countries China enacted a new arbitration law already. At that time Chinese arbitration law was referred to the UNCITRAL Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration for internationalization of Chinese commercial arbitration system. China also internationalized the panel of arbitrators by increasing the foreign arbitrators of the panel of arbitrators of CIETAC. These measures adopted by China will be the model of dispute resolution and the commercial arbitration system in other major countries in Asia.

• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.23 no.3
• /
• pp.185-212
• /
• 2013

In this paper, a conceptual model of legal culture based on Ehrlich's "living law" theory and Cole's social-cultural explanation can explain the low utilization rates of arbitration of Japan and the high utilization rates of arbitration in the United States, simultaneously. This model highlights the clash between social norms and legal provisions in Japan. Japan has developed a two-tiered system of dispute resolution. At the official level, Japanese people accept the legal system imposed by the outside world. But, at a deeper level, they utilize diverse forms of informal dispute resolution mechanisms, such as reconcilement and conciliation, reflecting their own social norms. In contrast, there is no conflict between social norms and legal provisions in United States. This study may show that there are distinctions between American-style arbitration and Japanese-style arbitration, reflecting their own respective social norms. The question of reconciliation between the American style of arbitration and the Japanese style of arbitration can be resolved by an international arbitrator.

• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.23 no.4
• /
• pp.77-96
• /
• 2013

International Arbitration has distinguished itself as a method for dispute resolution that pleases both common and civil law practitioners. It, however, is not free of criticism, especially when fact-finding and evidentiary issues are at play. Perhaps because fact-finding is very closely linked to the culture in which they lie, perhaps because of the lack of a clear evidentiary rules governing international arbitration, a theory of evidence in international arbitration is still far fetched. Through the analysis of the distinctions between dispute resolution systems and the search for truth paradigm, this paper aims to develop and present an outline for the development of a theory of evidence in international arbitration.

• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.21 no.2
• /
• pp.85-112
• /
• 2011

These days utilization of copyright in daily life and economic activities is becoming more important than ever, and IT technology is developing day by day. Along with those fact, copyright infringement and dispute is naturally increasing. This thesis dealt with the 3 different issues of ADR on copyright. The First part, introduce ADR system that was performed by Korea Copyright Committee according to Copyright law. This paper evaluate the committee's efforts to provide resolution of copyright disputes via conciliation was effective. So it needs to be look over several countries' ADR, beside conventional judicial remedy. And Korea's copyright conciliation system which is successfully operating also introduced. Second, In many countries, including South Korea are take advantage of conciliation as the way to settle down the dispute over copyright. Furthermore, looked over if we can use arbitration as tool to settle dispute or not. Currently in Korea, patent dispute is handled by Industrial Property Dispute Conciliation Committee(The Invention Promotion Act Ch.5) and Layout-design Review and Mediation Committee(The Act on the Layout-designs of Semiconductor Integrated Circuits Art.29-34), but using performance of those two committee is still too low. In comparison, the copyright committee, a affiliation organization of the ministry of culture, sports and tourism has much more result in conciliation compare with patent dispute. Copyright disputes has arbitrability of it's subject-matter and many regulating organs are interested in it. (especially, binding of arbitral award and final resolution). Take advantage of both conciliation and arbitration could be good way to resolve copyright disputes. Third, the writer look at the proposal on the creation of Northeast Regional Center for Intellectual Property ADR. Because of the nature of copyright and rapid development of internet technology, international use of work become more frequent and accordingly infringement cases are increasing. The role of commercial arbitration regimes and institutions which has progressed significantly worldwide level, but which has only just begun in the intellectual property ADR area, leads also to a clash of often very different legal cultures and protection in a market economy. International cooperation in regional area with conflict interests becomes an important alternative. But it will depend on the building of regional institutions and mechanisms. The feasibility of this proposal and preconditions were examined. Establishment of new international organization requires a lot of time, cost and efforts. And risk of failure is much too high. Therefore factual, statistical review should be preceded. In addition, technical measures, such as on-line arbitration is necessary to review also. Furthermore in order to establish new organization, the relative law, legal environment, public sentiment and international compliance must be carefully considered with factual review about the needs and economic benefits of each country Yet on complex regulatory matters such as IP and ADR, a great deal of the potential benefits from international standards arises not from the international legal framework nor even the formal content of national legislation, but from the informed and effective use made of the possibilities within the system, including by policymakers and regulators.