• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제23권1호
• /
• pp.25-53
• /
• 2013

With the Korea-China FTA negotiations currently on the line, the importance of research into the FTA dispute settlement system has been increasing. In this paper, a comparison of Korea and China's FTA dispute settlement agreements concluded with ASEAN is contemplated, and implications for the future of the Korea-China FTA have been suggested. The FTA dispute settlement agreements with ASEAN concluded by both Korea and China provide perspectives on both sides. This agreement with ASEAN also provides a standard for the potential Korea-China FTA agreement. Specifically, the basis of these agreements with ASEAN is the same, although there are clear distinctions, described in a more detailed manner. A problem arises when there has been no discussion on dispute settlement agreements in Korea, especially of the agreement with ASEAN, whereas the opposite is true of the China counterpart. In this paper, Chinese academic FTA dispute settlement agreement studies have been also examined.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제17권1호
• /
• pp.3-32
• /
• 2007

This age is called the age of global trade, and the World Trade Organization is a forerunner in promoting the global free trade through multilateral negotiations as the global level. On the other hand, regional economic cooperation such as North American Free Trade Agreement(NAFTA) is appearing, saying that promotion by WTO takes too much time. As is known to everybody, Europe is on the way of integrating member states through EU not to mention economic cooperation. Even in Asia such tendency is shown through ASEAN, Korea, China and Japan in Northeast Asia share geographical proximity, many common historical experiences, and similar cultural norms and values although they have disparities in stages of development, trade and economic policies, and financial and legal frameworks. Under the situation, efforts have been made between three countries of Korea, China and Japan for the conclusion of investment agreements including FTA. If the conclusion of the FTA between the three countries would be realized, it would promote regional trade and investment, contributing to economic growth in the Northeast Asian region. The writer in this paper reviewed the settlement of private commercial dispute including investment dispute arising from the FTA and investment agreements. The investment dispute is quite different from an ordinary commercial dispute arising from commercial transactions in view of disputing parties, applicable laws and rules, etc. Therefore it is a problem of vital importance that the parties interested in investment under the FTA as well as the relevant investment agreement should understand and cope with the settlement mechanism of investment disputes arising therefrom. The ICSID Convention provides facilities for the conciliation and arbitration of disputes between member countries and investors who qualify as nationals of other member countries. All contracting states of the ICSID Convention are required by the Convention to recognize and enforce the ICSID arbitral awards. The New York Convention(formally called "United Nations Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards") is also applicable for the enforcement of arbitral awards to be rendered under the FTA. As to applicable rules, the UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules may be required for the settlement of investment disputes under the FTA. This Rules has adopted by the internationally recognized arbitral organizations although it was developed primarily for use in ad hoc arbitration. The promotion of arbitral cooperation may be realized through agreements between arbitral institutions. Especially under the NAPTA system, a central common system was established to resolve jointly private commercial disputes arising from such free trades by the initiative of arbitral organizations among the member countries. It is called Commercial Arbitration and Mediation Center for the Americas(CAMCA), which may be a good example for the settlement promotion of the private commercial disputes between Korea and other relevant countries.

• 국제지역연구
• /
• 제22권1호
• /
• pp.3-21
• /
• 2018

냉전시대부터 존재해 온 국제 협정과 기구는 이와 비슷한 목표와 역할을 가지고 탈냉전시대에 탄생한 수많은 새로운 국제 협정과 기구들로부터 어떠한 영향을 받는가? 이 질문에 대해 일부 학자들은 부정적 영향을 받을 수 있다고 주장하고 있다. 이 연구는 냉전시대에 기원을 두고 있는 국제기구 중 하나인 WTO의 경우에는 어떠한지를 검토하는데 그 목표가 있다. 즉 WTO의 분쟁해결절차의 이용 혹은 제소 건수가 이 기구의 회원국들이 참여한 다자적, 혹은 양자적 FTA의 경험과 국제기구 경험으로부터 긍정적 영향을 받는지, 혹은 부정적 영향을 받는지를 분석하고 있다. 이 분석은, 일부 학자들의 주장과는 달리, WTO가 출범한 1995년부터 2016년까지 모든 회원국들을 분석 대상으로 할 때 그들의 FTA 경험이 WTO 제소 건수를 증가시키는 경향이 있고, 또 유럽연합의 개별 회원국들을 제외한 모든 WTO 회원국들을 분석대상으로 할 때 그들의 국제기구 경험도 WTO 제소 건수를 증가시키는 경향이 있다는 결과를 나타내고 있다.

• 중국학논총
• /
• 제72호
• /
• pp.101-122
• /
• 2021

Over the past 20 years, labor standards have been widely used in free trade agreements. The U.S., the European Union and China have all aggressively signed free trade agreements with their trading partners, developing different styles on labor standards. According to the study, the implementation of the KOREa-EU FREE trade agreement has been hampered by ongoing disputes over the terms of the FREE trade agreement and the ILO since the korea-EU free trade agreement was signed. Because in order to break this deadlock, relevant scholars have done a lot of research, but mainly focused on the economic and trade field. Therefore, this paper for the first time systematically studies the substantive focus of disputes over FTA and ILO clauses, and carefully analyzes the domestic law amended by South Korea, and provides suggestions and inspirations for China by drawing lessons from the revision model of South Korea's domestic law. This is from a newperspective: the essence of the korea-EU FTA and ILO disputes is the conflict between international law and domestic law, and the conflict between free trade agreements and human rights protection. It holds that the essence of disputes should be sorted out from the perspective of legal principles and human rights protection, and the free trade and human rights protection should be actively coordinated. In order to make China more actively integrate into the international economy, China should adopt a positive attitude to revise and perfect its own laws, so as to realize the purpose of common development of international trade and human rights protection.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제19권1호
• /
• pp.121-145
• /
• 2009

South Korea has investment agreements such as FTAs, BITs with several countries. Up to now, no single case has been registered against the Korean government on breach of investment agreements, but it is likely that the number of such cases would increase. Therefore, an investor-state dispute settlement system, an arbitral procedure by which a foreign investor may seek compensation of damage against the host country, is gaining its importance. The provision of the ISDS has been one of the hottest issues in Korea while the Kor-US FTA was being signed. In this respect, with the growing number of regional agreements such as BITs and FTAs, a careful scrutiny on the ISDS is necessary for Korea. I have therefore studied theoretically subjects including the National Treatment(NT), the Most-Favored Nation(MFN), Fair and Equitable Treatment and Expropriation - those that have been the objects of protection on investors. And I have analyzed ICSID arbitral awards and provided implications. In the ICSID arbitral awards, the Fair and Equitable Treatment turned out to be the most recognized violation on investors by the host State in terms of investor protection. On the other hand, Indirect Expropriation - a matter of which public anxiety was shown led by civic groups - was not generally recognized in arbitral awards. This study is written for sake of governments, local autonomous entities and public enterprises that are in charge of FTAs and BITs.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제15권2호
• /
• pp.61-91
• /
• 2005

It is well recognized that the availability of prompt, effective and economical means of dispute resolution is an important element in the orderly growth and encouragement of international trade and investment. Increasingly, ADR(Alternative Dispute Resolution) including arbitration and mediation, instead of litigation in national courts, has become the preferred means of resolving private international commercial disputes. Under the situation, efforts for settlement of trade and investment disputes by ADR have been made between Korea and China through trade and investment agreements and arbitration agreement. Judging from the importance of economic exchange between Korea and Qingdao including Shandong Province, The Korean Commercial Arbitration Board(KCAB) and The Qingdao Arbitration Commission(QAC) should strengthen mutual cooperation to develop efficient methods of resolving commercial disputes arising between the two countries and to assist parties in solving those disputes through conclusion of arbitral agreement. Recently, efforts for conclusion of a Korea-China-Japan Free Trade Agreement(FTA) received strong support at Korea-Japan and Korea-China Summit Meeting held on June and July, 2003 respectively. If the conclusion of FTA among the three countries would be realized, it would promote regional trade and investment, contributing to economic growth in the Northeast Asian region. Under the circumstances, the key arbitral institutions including KCAB and QAC should consider to take the initiative in setting up tentatively called ${\ulcorner}$Joint Arbitration Center for Northeast Asia${\lrcorner}$ for which the CAMCA of NAFTA will be the good example.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제25권3호
• /
• pp.185-226
• /
• 2015

As in some developing countries and more recently some developed countries worldwide and in the Asian region, Australia has faced significant internal opposition and public debate especially over treaty-based investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS). As outlined in Part II(1), concerns have re-emerged and escalated since the first-ever claim was brought against Australia regarding its tobacco plain packaging legislation, in 2011 by Philip Morris Asia under an old BIT with Hong Kong. However, Australia signed bilateral FTAs with Korea in 2014 and with China in 2015, including ISDS protections, prompting several sets of parliamentary inquiries (Part II(2)). Australia's close trading partner, New Zealand, had already concluded an FTA with China in 2008 that included more expansive ISDS-backed investor protections. In 2015, the New Zealand Parliament has been debating ratification of its own FTA with Korea, with ISDS also now attracting growing scrutiny, as elaborated in Part III below. In both bilateral FTA negotiations, the present Korean government seems to have reverted to a strong preference for concluding investment agreements with extensive ISDS protections, despite public and parliamentary debate around 2011 in the context of ratifying its FTA with the United States. As mentioned briefly in the concluding Part IV, Korea's stance has significant implications for the future trajectory of treaty-based ISDS - and indeed international arbitration more generally - in the Asia-Pacific region, and perhaps even globally.