• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.36
• /
• pp.87-109
• /
• 2007

This Comment explores the ICSID case of CMS Gas Transmission Company v. Argentine Republic, awarded on May 12, 2005. The Part II of this Comment first describes the relevant facts of the case including the some background for readers' understanding and the Part III summaries the claimant's requests and the decisions rendered by the Arbitral Tribunal in the Award. At Part IV, the Comment addresses the issue of determinating laws applicable to the merits of dispute in case that the parties of the case have not chosen a governing law, and at Part V, takes a close look into three main issues of (i) the indirect expropriation of the investment, (ii) the breach of fair and equitable treatment and (iii) the protections under umbrella clauses. In this CMS case, we see first that while the Tribunal affirmed that any indirect expropriation can occur from incidental interference depriving the foreign investor of the use or reasonable-to-be-expected economic benefit even if not necessarily to the obvious benefit of the host State, the Tribunal denied the occurrence of indirect expropriation in this case by holding that the Government of Argentina has not breached the standard of protection laid down in the Treaty. Secondly, however, regarding the issue of fair and equitable treatment, we see that the Tribunal, finding Argentina's breach of obligations, affirmed that the foreign investor can expect the host State to act in a consistent manner, free from ambiguity and totally transparently in its relations with the foreign investor, which can give the foreign investor certain degree of foreseeability. Thirdly and finally, we see that, on base of the effect of the umbrella clause, the Tribunal recognized the obligation of the host State undertaken not to freeze the tariff regime or subject it to price controls and not to alter the basic rules governing contracts between the foreign investor and the host State without the first's written consent. However, the protection under the umbrella clause is available only when there is a specific breach of rights and obligations under BIT or a violation of contract rights protected under BIT.

• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.22 no.3
• /
• pp.141-163
• /
• 2012

In Korea, although nearly all maritime arbitration cases are dealt with by the Korean Commercial Arbitration Board (KCAB), the total number of cases that are referred to the KCAB is relatively small compared with the total number of maritime cases that occur in Korea. There may be reasons why maritime arbitration is not utilized more in Korea. However, of the above reasons, the superseding one may be that there is still a lack of confidence in the credibility and foreseeability of maritime arbitration in Korea. To expand the use of maritime arbitration in Korea, it is essential that the base surrounding maritime arbitration be expanded. In addition, it is also necessary that specialists receivetraining in maritime law. In this context, it is strongly recommended that maritime and admiralty law be taught in law schools and be included as a regular subject on the Korean bar exam. Additionally, to promote maritime arbitration, a rule should be introduced allowing for shortened arbitration proceedings in Korea. Although Chapter 8 of the KCAB Arbitration Rules provide for "Expedited Procedure," this process alone is not because the rules for Expedited Procedure generally apply in arbitration cases where both parties have agreed in a separate agreement to follow the procedures provided or in any domestic arbitration valued atless than 100,000,000 Korean won. Therefore, the KCAB Arbitration Rules for Expedited Procedure must be reformed to encompass international arbitrations. Additionally, experts who are experienced in the maritime sector should be elected as arbitrators. Given the factthat a fair number of arbitration cases can be characterized as international, it is important that businesspersons who are very fluent in English be appointed as arbitrators in order to increase the reliability of maritime arbitration in Korea and save costs. Meanwhile, because lawyers and scholars constitute a considerable portion of KCAB arbitrators, commercial persons from relevant industries should be enlisted as arbitrators. Even though there are arguments for the establishment of an independent maritime arbitration board in Korea, establishment of a separate maritime arbitration board will not directly guarantee the prosperity of maritime arbitration in Korea. Instead of instituting a new maritime arbitration board, it is better that a reorganized KCAB modify existing arbitration proceedings to make them faster and more economical if maritime arbitration is to prosper. In this regard, ad-hoc arbitration would be an option for speedy and thrifty maritime arbitration. Finally, to gain the confidence of domestic and foreign parties, we cannot ignore the importance of advertising the specialties and qualifications of the KCAB and its personnel among business entities.

• The Journal of Korean Medical History
• /
• v.19 no.2
• /
• pp.101-118
• /
• 2006

Phenomena experienced by all individuals and cultural interpretation of such phenomena seem to be irrelevant to the change of time. The subject dream to be discussed in this study is one of them. Nevertheless, people's attitude of understanding dreams in the past is obviously different from the contemporary one, and the interpretation of dreams reveals the science of the corresponding age. Bishop Daveluy, a missionary to Chosun in the mid 19th century, observed Korean people's hardly understandable response to dreams. According to his explanation, Chosun people regarded what they saw in a dream as a fact. It might have been quite long that a dream is regarded as a sign of the future. However, how a dream can be a sign of the future is explained different according to the science of the corresponding age. Many records on dreams since the late Koryo Dynasty and the early Chosun Dynasty did not give satisfactory answers to this question. However, new interpretations of dreams were attempted occasionally in the process that the Sung Confucian view of nature in the Chosun Dynasty was being matured. One of such interpretations is that a dream is obviously a phenomenon of human cognition and there is a rule behind dreams. I t was believed that the rule is a flow of energy defined by reason penetrating through the past, the present and the future and, as a consequence, dreams are future oriented. The view that a dream is a phenomenon with a causal relation is observed more specifically in medicine. I t was understood basically as a pathological phenomenon but, at the same time, a substance in an organic relation with the human body. In addition, it was understood as the results of facts (physiological and pathological processes) experienced by the body in the past and the sign of diseases in the future. However, from the viewpoint of contemporary science based on empirical rationalism, such foreseeability is fundamentally unacceptable. In contemporary science, in which scientific analysis of phenomena has to be of the past tense, dreams exist as the representations of the past. What Bishop Daveluy saw in Korean people was a phenomenon observed when the pre modern met the modern as pre modern people's life and idea were viewed from a modern people's eye.

• Korean Journal of Culture and Social Issue
• /
• v.26 no.1
• /
• pp.25-45
• /
• 2020

Intentionality judgement in criminal cases is a core area of fact finding that is root of guilty and sentencing judgment on the defendant. However, the third party is not sure the intentionality because it reflects subjective aspect of agent. Thus, mechanism behind intentionality judgment is an important factor to be properly understood by the academia and the criminal justice system. However, previous studies regarding intentionality judgment models have shown inconsistent results. Mental-state models proposed foreseeability(belief) and desire of agent at the time of the offence as key factors in intentionality judgment. These factors consistent with central things on intentionality judgment in criminal law. However, key factors in moral-evaluation models are blameworthiness of agent and badness of outcome reflected on the consequent aspect of act. Recently, deep-self concordance model emerged suggesting important factors on intentionality judgment are not mental states and moral evaluations but individual's deep-self. However, these models are limited in that they do not consider the important features of criminal cases, that the consequence of the case is inevitably negative, and therefore the actor who is a party to legal punishment rarely expresses his or her mental state at the time of the act. Therefore, this study suggests that, based on the existing intentionality judgment studies and the characteristics of the criminal case, the inference about who the agent was originally will play a key role in judging the intentionality in the criminal case. This is the moral-character model. Futhermore, In this regard, this study discussed what the media and criminal justice institutions should keep in mind and the directions for future research.