• The Journal of Information Technology
• /
• v.8 no.1
• /
• pp.27-41
• /
• 2005

Electronic Trade of increasing is the use of the Internet makes it possible for business to expand their markets and render services. However, it also brought up many problems caused by various issues. The problems encompass consumer protection and dispute settlement between the disputed parties. Online ADR have some advantage that are convenience, low-cost, legitimate to online users and avoids jurisdiction issues and some disadvantages that are loss of the human factor, lack of accessibility, lack of confidentiality and security and difficulty of enforcing arbitral agreements. This purpose of this paper is to reviews the types of Online ADR, as the dispute settlement way in Electronic Trade. This study points out the task that korea has to promote the Online ADR for more effective and efficient dispute settlements.

• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.13
• /
• pp.699-733
• /
• 2000

This article analyzes the state-of-play of WTO dispute settlement for first four and a half years. Remarkable points found on this analysis are as follows: First, the Quad consisting of the United States, the European Community (EC), Canada and Japan has participated in the WTO dispute settlement mechanism more frequently than any other WTO member. Second, among developing country members some leading countries such as Korea, Brazil and India have relied actively upon the mechanism to claim and defend their rights and obligations under the WTO rules. Third, bilateral dispute settlements generally have been preferred to multilateral dispute settlements by the panel or Appellate Body. Fourth, observation of the Appellate Body proceedings well shows WTO members' strategy to use every process available to them. Fifth, the provisions of GATT 1994 have been most frequently invoked by the members. GATS and TRIPS Agreement disputes are mainly involved in developed countries, in particular the U.S. and the EC. Sixth, very high winning ratio in the panel and Appellate Body process indicates that complaining parties review the possibility to get favorable rulings even before referring to the Dispute Settlement Body (DSB) and prepare for the case very thoroughly. Seventh, roughly speaking, disputes were settled within two or three years. Therefore, seeking bilateral dispute settlement can be more advantageous to a complaining party than referring to a panel or an arbitrator because of low costs and short time period in dispute settlement. Finally, the DSB approved retaliatory actions for winning complaining parties against the defending parties who had rejected implementation of its rulings and recommendations. In conclusion, it can be said that the WTO dispute settlement mechanism has been operated very successfully for the first four and a half years. It is hoped that continued study on state-of-play of WTO dispute settlement mechanism will be contributory to improved national interest of Korea.

• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.29 no.3
• /
• pp.121-140
• /
• 2019

First, the purpose of this research is to review the Online Dispute Resolution (ODR) regulations in Korea to resolve disputes which can arise in international e-commerce in the near future. Second, this research tries to look for alternative solutions to dispute resolutions according to these regulations. Third, this research pursues to enhance the effectiveness of business deals by providing efficient and satisfactory dispute resolution methods for e-commerce business. Furthermore, this study evaluates the definition of global e-commerce by comparing Online Dispute Resolution (ODR) with Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR). Through analyzing the domestic ODR system and ADR system, this research could boost the employment of settlements in small-sized disputes through easy and convenient consumer access to both ODR and ADR procedures. The enhancement of the competitiveness of Korean companies in the global market is estimated to take place as a result. This research is estimated to provide benefits to our businesses both domestically and internationally by using ODR regulations and ADR methods. Moreover, this research is anticipated to verify usefulness in terms of consumer protection by advancing consumers' access to dispute solution authorities locally and abroad.

• International Commerce and Information Review
• /
• v.5 no.1
• /
• pp.159-177
• /
• 2003

As many kinds of transactions and informations move onto the Internet, methods to resolve dispute arising from this trend must also move onto the Internet. The Internet has heightened interest in Alternative Dispute Resolution(ADR). Some organizations are using the new technology in the field of dispute resolution, for example, by establishing web sites and offering communications through the Internet. Online ADR provides an attractive solution to an important part of the jurisdictional challenges presented by the Internet. This study reviews the types of online ADR as the dispute settlement way in electronic commerce. Especially this paper points out the task that Korea has to promote the online ADR for more effective and efficient dispute settlements.

• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.68
• /
• pp.89-121
• /
• 2015

Investor-State Dispute Settlement(ISDS) grants a foreign investor the right to access an international arbitrator, if he believes actions taken by a host government are in breach of commitments made in an investment agreement or an investment treaty. The arbitration procedure of ICSID is made specifically to resolve investment disputes, so most of investment disputes have been settled in accordance with the procedure. Owing to limitation of dispute settlements through the ICSID arbitration procedure, several investment dispute conciliation schemes have been emerged as alternatives. In the case of a conciliation, the conciliation procedure will be in progress based on arbitrary agreement between parties, and if both parties agree on a conciliation program, then the arbitrary execution rate is relatively higher than that of arbitration procedures. In addition, it is evaluated that the time duration of conducting a conciliation procedure is in general rather short in 8 to 24months, and its incumbent cost is also rather inexpensive. Most of all, through amicable settlement of a dispute between a foreign investor and a host state, the foreign investor may continue his investment activities without a hitch, while the host state may invite more investment without any risk of losing its external credibility. In conclusion, it is desirable to lead any investment dispute between a foreign investor and a host state settle in accordance with the dispute settlement procedure as specified in the relevant investment agreement. In addition, to make the foreign investor continue his investment activities, it will be necessary to provide a separate investment dispute conciliation system aside from such arbitration procedures to cope any unexpected incident flexibly.

• 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.28 no.4
• /
• pp.89-110
• /
• 2018

The purposes of this study are as follows: First, this study reviews the Online Dispute Resolution (ODR) regulations of the EU to resolve disputes which can arise in international e-commerce in the future. Second, this study tries to seek out alternative solutions to dispute resolutions based on these regulations. Third, this study increases the efficiency of the transactions by proposing effective and satisfactory dispute resolution methods for international e-commerce. First, this study reviews the concept of cross-border e-commerce, generally explores ODR, and creates comparisons with Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR). Subsequently, this study looks into domestic ODR system and analyzes the regulations of EU ODR. This study suggests the implications of the European ODR regulations in the conclusion. The EU ODR platform is considered greatly significant in that it has increased the possibility of settlements in small disputes by enhancing consumers' accessibility to ADR procedures. Therefore, this thesis proposes a method for Korean companies to resolve disputes that may arise in e-commerce with EU by using the ODR platform. As a result, it is expected to increase the competitiveness of Korean companies in the EU market. Both legislative trends related to the ODR of the EU and establishment of the EU ODR platform have significant implications for Korean businesses in Europe. This study is expected to be useful for our businesses in the EU in reviewing the applicability of the EU ODR regulations and the dispute settlement procedures through the EU ODR platform. In addition, this study is expected to prove useful in relation to consumer protection by enhancing consumers' accessibility to dispute settlement institutions in domestic electronic commerce.

• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.26 no.4
• /
• pp.151-179
• /
• 2016

Emerging as a strategic domain of the service industry, the drone logistics industry is evolving into a zero effort industry, which realizes smart device service ranging from corporate services to daily customer services. The role of the drone industry is becoming increasingly important in strengthening national competitiveness, as well as corporate competitiveness, beyond the strengthening of product competitiveness. Although drones have various strengths and weaknesses for industries, there are plenty of possibilities for diverse disputes and conflicts due to lack of related laws, regulations, and institutional norms, as well as unsolved problems related to technologies and operations; that is, there are still policy tasks and problems to be solved such as unauthorized seizure of drones, hacking, protection of personal privacy, safety concerns, regulation and limitation of flying areas, damage relief, and dispute settlements. Thus, in order to vitalize the drone industry as a future growth engine while responding to the changes in the environment of the drone industry in Korea and overseas and to strengthen national and corporate competitiveness by harmonizing with advanced management innovations, it is necessary to conduct in-depth discussions and review policy issues related to the vitalization of the drone industry. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to review the domestic and overseas realities and statuses of the drone logistics industry and application cases, analyze policies regarding the drone logistics industry of each country, review general theories on the solution of disputes arising out of the transactions in the drone logistics industry, and, as a conclusion, suggest desirable policy issues for the vitalization of the drone logistics industry in Korea.

• Korea Trade Review
• /
• v.45 no.3
• /
• pp.147-166
• /
• 2020

As the volume of trade between Korea and Vietnam increases, the number and amount of commercial disputes between Korean and Vietnamese companies are increasing. In the case of Vietnam, due to differences in the arbitration system and norms due to the socialist state system, foreign companies lack confidence in the settlement of disputes through commercial arbitration in Vietnam. At this point, it is necessary to not only discuss commercial disputes and settlements, but also to closely review and understand Vietnam's commercial dispute settlement system. Therefore, this study examines the current status and characteristics of Vietnam's commercial disputes and analyzes the actual problems of Vietnam Commercial Arbitration System that arise through the arbitral award of the Vietnam International Arbitration Center (VIAC), Vietnam's representative arbitration agency, and precedents on the recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitration awards in Vietnamese courts. In the end, this study seeks to revitalize the Vietnam Commercial Arbitration so that each disputed party may quickly deal with the commercial disputes, and seeks a more smooth solution through commercial arbitration in future trade claims between Korean and Vietnamese companies.

• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.12 no.1
• /
• pp.271-321
• /
• 2002

Every year, many million of business transactions take place. Ocassionally, disagreements develop over these business transactions. Many of these disputes are resolved by mediation, arbitration and out-of-court settlement options. The American Arbitration Association(AAA) helps resolve a wide range of disputes through mediation, arbitration, elections and other out-of-court settlement procedures. The AAA offers a broad range of dispute resolution services to business executives, attorneys, individuals, trade associations, unions, management, consumers, families, communities, and all level of governments. The 198,491 cases composed of the 194,303 arbitration cases and the 4,188 mediation cases, were filed with the AAA in 2000. These case filings represent a full range of matters, including commercial finance, construction, labor and employment, environmental, health care, insurance, real state, securities, and technology disputes. The Korean Commercial Arbitration Board (KCAB) does more than render arbitration services. It helps facilitate settlements and guarantee implementation thereof between trading partners at home and abroad involving disputes related to such areas as the sale of commodities, construction, joint venture agreements, technical assistance, agency agreements, and maritime transport. The 643 cases composed of the the 197 arbitration cases and the 446 mediation cases, were filed with the KCAB in 2001. There are some differences between the AAA and the KCAB regarding the number and the area of mediation and arbitration case filings, the breath of service offerings, the scope of alternative dispute resolution, and the education and training. In order to apply to the proceedings of the commercial mediation and arbitration, the AAA has the Commercial Mediation Rules, the Commercial Arbitration Rules, the Expedited Procedures, the Optional Procedures for Large, Complex Commerical Dispute, and the Optional Rules for Emergency Measures of Protection as amended and effective on September 1, 2000. In order to apply to the proceedings of commercial arbitration, the KCAB has the Arbitration Rules as amended by the Supreme Court on April 27, 2000, which have been changed to incorporate the revisions of the Arbitration Act that went into effect on December 31, 1999. There are some differences between the AAA's commercial Arbitration Rules and the KCAB's Arbitration Rules regarding the clauses of jurisdiction and administrative conference, number of arbitrators, communication with arbitrator, vacancies, preliminary hearing, exchange of information, oaths, evidence by affidavit and posthearing filing of documents or others, interim measures, serving of notice, form of award, scope of award, delivery of award to parties, modification of award, release of liability, administrative fees, neutral arbitrator's compensation, and expedited procedures. In conclusion, for the vitalization of KCAB and its ADR system, the following measures should be taken : the effective case management, the development of on0-line ADR, the establishment of ADR system of electronic commerce disputes, and the variety of dispute resolution rules in each expert field.