• Journal of Legislation Research
• /
• no.44
• /
• pp.655-688
• /
• 2013

Most of all the transfer of undertakings in such a service provision business as labour-intensive operation creates uncertainty of employment, aggravates terms of employment and breaks a trade union. However there are no regulations in Korea to protect employees from these undesirable situations. On the other hand Great Britain has introduced the concept of a transfer of undertakings by service provision change in 2006. It was intended to remove or at least alleviate the uncertainties and difficulties created by the need under TUPE 1981 and EU Directive to establish a transfer of a stable economic identity which retained its identity in the hands of the alleged transferee. In contrast to the words used to define transfer in the 1981 Regulations 'service provision change' is a wholly new statutory concept and distinguished from the economic entity. The new provisions seems to be straightforwards and the circumstances in which service provision change is established are clearly set out in Regulations. In this context there is no need for a judicially prescribed multi-factorial approach, as advanced by European Court of Justice like Spijkers test. The new concept of service provision change apply even though there are some minor difference or differences between the nature of the tasks carried on after service provision change as compared with before it. A commonsense and pragmatic approach is required and It is enough only to ask whether the activities carried on by the alleged transferee are fundamentally or essentially the same as those carried out by the alleged transfer. TUPE 2006 of Great Britain far exceeding the scope of the Acquired Rights Directive is full of suggestions as a model of legislation to secure a stable employment itself and favorable and fair conditions of employment. More active efforts are needed for lawmaking to prohibit a dismissal and vary conditions of employment for the reason of the transfer of undertakings itself.

• Journal of Applied Biological Chemistry
• /
• v.61 no.4
• /
• pp.305-314
• /
• 2018

'New Breeding Techniques (NBTs)' have been one of hot issues, since their future will be affected profoundly by national as well as international regulatory landscapes. In this review, we compare characteristics of NBTs with conventional and genetic modification, and analyze genetically modified organism (GMO) regulatory systems in the context of possible regulation of NBTs. NBTs are very heterogeneous in terms of principles, methodologies, and final products. As Living Modified Organisms (LMO) is defined in the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety (CPB) as an organism containing novel combination of genetic materials obtained by the use of modern biotechnology, CPB as well as other national legislations locate itself somewhere in the middle between product-based and process-based regulations. It is also noted that jurisdictions with regulatory systems more oriented to product-based one tend to be more productive and decide or may decide to exempt site-directed nucleases-1 from GMO regulation. In this context, Korean legislations are reviewed to clarify the commons and differences in GMO definitions. Act on Transboundary Movement of LMO Act, Food Sanitation Act and Agricultural and Fishery Products Quality Control Act are three major acts to regulate GMOs. It is noted that there are differences in the definition of LMO or GM food/products especially between the LMO Act and the Food Sanitation Act. Such differences may cause conflicts between Acts when policy-decision regarding the regulation of NBTs is made. Therefore, it is necessary to reorganize legislations before policies regarding the regulation of any techniques from biotechnology are made.

• The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy
• /
• v.33 no.2
• /
• pp.267-290
• /
• 2018

This paper reviews and criticizes the EU Case of C-452/13, Germanwings GmbH v. Ronny Henning. Under this case, Ronny Henning later sued Lufthansa's budget carrier Germanwings after it refused to pay him 250 euros compensation for a delay he said totalled more than three hours. Germanwings, however, maintained his flight had arrived only two hours and 58 minutes behind schedule. In those circumstances, the following question to the European Court of Justice (ECJ) for a preliminary ruling: What time is relevant for the term time of arrival used in Articles 2, 5 and 7 of Regulation [No 261/2004]: (a) the time that the aircraft lands on the runway (touchdown); (b) the time that the aircraft reaches its parking position and the parking brakes are engaged or the chocks have been applied (in-block time); (c) the time that the aircraft door is opened; (d) a time defined by the parties in the context of party autonomy? ECJ says that the situation of passengers on a flight does not change substantially when their aircraft touches down on the runway at the destination airport, when that aircraft reaches its parking position and the parking brakes are engaged or when the chocks are applied, as the passengers continue to be subject, in the enclosed space in which they are sitting, to various constraints. Therefore, it is only when the passengers are permitted to leave the aircraft and the order is given to that effect to open the doors of the aircraft that the passengers may in principle resume their normal activities without being subject to those constraints. ECJ rules that it is apparent that Articles 2, 5 and 7 of Regulation No 261/2004 must be interpreted as meaning that the concept of 'arrival time', which is used to determine the length of the delay to which passengers on a flight have been subject, corresponds to the time at which at least one of the doors of the aircraft is opened, the assumption being that, at that moment, the passengers are permitted to leave the aircraft.

• The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy
• /
• v.30 no.2
• /
• pp.469-497
• /
• 2015

In 2009 Iridium 33, a satellite owned by the American Iridium Communications Inc. and Kosmos-2251, a satellite owned by the Russian Space Forces, collided at a speed of 42,120 km/h and an altitude of 789 kilometers above the Taymyr Peninsula in Siberia. NASA estimated that the satellite collision had created approximately 1,000 pieces of debris larger than 10 centimeters, in addition to many smaller ones. By July 2011, the U.S. Space Surveillance Network(SSN) had catalogued over 2,000 large debris fragments. On January 11, 2007 China conducted a test on its anti-satellite missile. A Chinese weather satellite, the FY-1C polar orbit satellite, was destroyed by the missile that was launched using a multistage solid-fuel. The test was unprecedented for having created a record amount of debris. At least 2,317 pieces of trackable size (i.e. of golf ball size or larger) and an estimated 150,000 particles were generated as a result. As far as the Space Treaties such as 1967 Outer Space Treaty, 1968 Rescue Agreement, 1972 Liability Convention, 1975 Registration Convention and 1979 Moon Agreement are concerned, few provisions addressing the space environment and debris in space can be found. In the early years of space exploration dating back to the late 1950s, the focus of international law was on the establishment of a basic set of rules on the activities undertaken by various states in outer space.. Consequently environmental issues, including those of space debris, did not receive the priority they deserve when international space law was originally drafted. As shown in the case of the 1978 "Cosmos 954 Incident" between Canada and USSR, the two parties settled it by the memorandum between two nations not by the Space Treaties to which they are parties. In 1994 the 66th conference of International Law Association(ILA) adopted "International Instrument on the Protection of the Environment from Damage Caused by Space Debris". The Inter-Agency Space Debris Coordination Committee(IADC) issued some guidelines for the space debris which were the basis of "the UN Space Debris Mitigation Guidelines" which had been approved by the Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space(COPUOS) in its 527th meeting. On December 21 2007 this guideline was approved by UNGA Resolution 62/217. The EU has proposed an "International Code of Conduct for Outer Space Activities" as a transparency and confidence-building measure. It was only in 2010 that the Scientific and Technical Subcommittee began considering as an agenda item the long-term sustainability of outer space. A Working Group on the Long-term Sustainability of Outer Space Activities was established, the objectives of which include identifying areas of concern for the long-term sustainability of outer space activities, proposing measures that could enhance sustainability, and producing voluntary guidelines to reduce risks to long-term sustainability. By this effort "Guidelines on the Long-term Sustainability of Outer Space Activities" are being under consideration. In the case of "Declaration of Legal Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exp1oration and Use of Outer Space" adopted by UNGA Resolution 1962(XVIII), December 13 1963, the 9 principles proclaimed in that Declaration, although all of them incorporated in the Space Treaties, could be regarded as customary international law binding all states considering the time and opinio juris by the responses of the world. Although the soft law such as resolutions, guidelines are not binding law, there are some provisions which have a fundamentally norm-creating character and customary international law. In November 12 1974 UN General Assembly recalled through a Resolution 3232(XXIX) "Review of the role of International Court of Justice" that the development of international law may be reflected, inter alia, by the declarations and resolutions of the General Assembly which may to that extend be taken into consideration by the judgements of the International Court of Justice. We are expecting COPUOS which gave birth 5 Space Treaties that it could give us binding space debris mitigation measures to be implemented based on space debris mitigation soft law in the near future.