• Korea Trade Review
• /
• v.44 no.6
• /
• pp.201-216
• /
• 2019

At present, there are various standards used as the governing law of contracts for establishing, implementing, and resolving disputes between the parties to international sales contracts, called "Forum Shopping." Uncertainty and increased transaction costs, which may arise from these various norms, may hinder the activation of international commerce. This study examines the process of enacting and examining various international unification norms that have emerged through international organizations to eliminate trade barriers caused by choice of governing law concerning parties involved in the international sale of goods. Issues regarding the positive and negative perspectives are discussed to identify obstacles to international unification norms. In particular, by comparing and analyzing the differences between the regulations of the CISG and PICC, the representative international unification norms on international sales contracts, the possibility of unification of the norms on international sales contracts are reviewed. Direction for the establishment of a single international regulation is presented for reducing the transaction costs and uncertainties in the international sale of goods.

• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.12
• /
• pp.227-252
• /
• 1999

In this Article the writer introduces the origin and preparation of "the UNIDROIT Principles of International Commercial Contracts". In May 1994 the Governing Council of the UNIDROIT gave its formal imprimatur to the UNIDROIT Principles and recommended their widest possible distribution in practice. After brief discussion of the establishment procedure of the UNIDROIT Principles the writer discusses the legal nature of the Principles as an international restatement of contract law. The UNIDROIT Principles has more flexibility than international convention. But it has deficit in the sense of legal stability. Also the scope of application of the Principles was discussed. It can be applied only to the international commercial contracts. It includes two basic principles in it's application, i. e. "commercial contracts" and "international contracts". For the rest of the Article the writer concentrates on the contents of the Principles and the basic ideas underlying the Principles from the point of view of the comparision between the UNIDROIT Principles and "the UN Convention on the International Sale of Goods" (CISG). The UNIDROIT Principles are only restatements and the CISG is an international convention. The application of the CISG is obligatory due to its nature as an international convention. In the contrary the possibility of the application of the UNIDROIT Principles is more flexible. The UNIDROIT Principles is a more comprehensive instrument than CISG. Therefore it can be applied to all kinds of international commercial contracts. In the contrary the CISG can be applied only to international sales contract. Since CISG only deals with contracts for the sale of goods, and the scope of the UNIDROIT Principles is much wider, no overlap can occur where contracts other than sales contracts are concerned. Rather the UNIDROIT Principles can supplement the CISG and the CISG also can be criteria in interpreting the UNIDROIT Principles. As the conclusion the writer summarizes the meanings of the UNIDROIT Principles and presupposed the futur perspectives of the Principles.

• Korea Trade Review
• /
• v.45 no.1
• /
• pp.221-239
• /
• 2020

Among various export contracts, the contents of contracts are very important. Various companies make use of this method. [Which method are you talking about?] However, the Korean law system has an insufficient understanding of the international legal system. This paper looks into the conditions related to contracts in relation to the legal system. This paper analyzes not only the Korean civil law system about illegality of contracts but also makes a comparison with other international systems, such as the UNIDROIT Principles. Especially, the Korean civil law system about the illegality of contracts is comparable with the UNIDROIT Principles system about illegality of contracts. The purpose of this paper is to examine the revitalization of Illegality of Contract. This paper also deals with improvement of International Commercial Activation. Thus, this paper will offer directions to International Trade Practitioners. There is disagreement regarding methods of action related to international trade practice. Especially, this study is good for commercial parties, especially overseas sales people.

• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.51
• /
• pp.101-131
• /
• 2011

The Governing Council of UNIDROIT at its 90th session adopted on 10 May 2011 the third edition of the Principles of International Commercial Contracts("UNIDROIT Principles 2010"). The UNIDROIT Principles of International Commercial Contracts first published in 1994 and in a second edition in 2004, are taken by legislators worldwide as a model for contract law reform and increasingly used in international contracting and arbitration practice, as well as by the courts to interpret and supplement the applicable domestic law. The UNIDROIT Principles are particularly useful to parties when negotiating and drafting international contracts. The new edition of the Principles, UNIDROIT Principles 2010, prepared by a group of experts from all over the world including representatives of numerous international organizations and arbitration centers. The UNIDROIT Principles 2010 contain new provisions on restitution in case of failed contracts, illegality, conditions, and plurality of obligors and obligees, while with respect to the text of the 2004 edition the only significant changes made relate to the Comments to Article 1.4.

• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.64
• /
• pp.3-37
• /
• 2014

The purpose of this paper is to examine thoroughly on passing of risk in contracts for the international sale of goods. Articles 66~70 of the CISG contain provisions on passing of risk. Article 66 states the main effect of passing risk to the buyer. Article 67~69 determine the decisive point in time which the risk passes from the seller to the buyer and article 70 attempts to explain the relation between passing of risk and fundamental breach of contract by the seller. As in the case corresponding Incoterms rules, the main issue to be resolved is which party should bear the economic consequences in the event that the goods are accidentally lost, damages or destroyed. Many cases also apply CISG articles 66~70 to contracts in which parties not agree on the use of trade terms such as CIF, CFR, FOB and FCA in Incoterms[R] 2010 Rule that provide for when the risk passes. In order to minimize disputes that may arise under contract, when drawing up a contracts for the international sale of goods, the specifics of agreement should be clearly stipulated. Consequently, the parties of contracts for the international sale of goods should take adequate measures, and it is required to prepare the contracts clearly as the specific terms to prevent and resolve contractual disputes on passing of risk.

• The Journal of Information Technology
• /
• v.1 no.2
• /
• pp.15-24
• /
• 1998

C.I.F. and F.O.B. contracts are the chief terms used in international trade contracts. But, in recently, the multimodal transport which is based on the containerization and the improvement of air transport has been grown gradually, Regardless of theese change in international trade environment, most of the contract of sale is made by C.I.F. and F.O.B. contracts which are based on the traditional port to port transport. In other words, there are some limitation in terms of legal base in which traditional C.I.F. and F.O.B. contract is applied to the changed environment. Especially, problems arised in marine insurance which export by F.O.B. trade terms. Therefore, when the parties of the contracts of sale make an sale contracts by using the container ship and Multimodal Transport, they should use the F.C.A. and C.I.P. contracts Instead of F.O.B. and C.I.F. contracts for the transport of goods. And parties of the contracts of sale need to gain a better understanding of the characteristic of F.C.A. and C.I.P. terms and the problem of the F.C.A. and C.I.P. contracts used in the performance on international multimodal transport.

• Journal of Legislation Research
• /
• no.44
• /
• pp.487-538
• /
• 2013

It is the most critical issue in recent international intellectual property licence disputes to decide the applicable laws to the license contracts. As Korea and the European Union(EU) reached free trade agreement(FTA), and the EU-Korea FTA entered into force on July 1, 2011, the FTA has boosted social, economic, cultural exchanges between the two. As a result of the increased transactions in those sectors, legal disputes are also expected to grow. This situation calls for extensive research and understanding of the choice of law principles applicable to international intellectual property license contracts in the EU. To decide the laws applicable to issues arising from international intellectual property license contracts disputes, the characterization of those issues is necessary for the purpose of applying private international law principles to them. In terms of characterization, intellectual property license contracts fall within contractual matters. In the EU, the primary rule of choice of law principles in contractual obligations is the Rome I Regulation. Because the choice of law rules, such as private international law principles, the Rome Convention(1980), and the Rome I Regulation, differ in the time of application, it is essential to clarify the time factor of related contracts. For example, the Rome I Regulation applies to contracts which were concluded as from December 17, 2009. Although party autonomy in international contracts disputes is generally allowed, if there is no choice of law agreement between the parties to the contracts, the objective test rule of private international law doctrine could be the best option. Following this doctrine, the Rome I Regulation Article 4, Paragraph 1 provides the governing law rules based on the types of contracts, but there is no room for intellectual property license contracts. After all, as the rule for governing law of those contracts, the Rome I Regulation Article 4, Paragraph 2 should be applied and if there are countries which are more closely connected to the contracts under the Rome I Regulation Article 4, Paragraph 3, the laws of those countries become the governing laws of the contracts. Nevertheless, if it is not possible to decide the applicable laws to the license contracts, the Rome I Regulation Article 4, Paragraph 4 should be applied in the last resort and the laws of the countries which are the most closely connected to the contracts govern the license contracts. Therefore, this research on the laws applicable to intellectual property license contracts under the Rome I Regulation suggests more systematic and effective solutions for future disputes in which Korea and the EU countries play the significant role as the connecting factors in the conflict of laws rules. Moreover, it helps to establish comprehensive and theoretical understanding of applying the Korean Private International Law to multifarious choice-of-law cases.

• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.22 no.3
• /
• pp.165-185
• /
• 2012

Franchising has proved over many years to be a successful commercial vehicle for the international distribution of products and services. However, there has long been missing a user-friendly model contract that would reflect the diversity of international franchising contracts. Because the ICC has drafted a model form of international franchising contracts, taking into account the most commonly encountered clauses in franchising agreements, their model could be used as a checklist of the core obligations of a cross-border franchise contract. Because there is no internationally agreed-upon uniform legislation on franchising, parties must rely on national laws and regulations applicable to the international franchise (when such laws and regulations exist) and should therefore very carefully draft stipulations for the legal status of the contract. This study has been intended to cite some provisions for striking a fair balance between the interests of the franchisor and those of the franchisee and for avoiding unfair trade acts in international franchising contracts.

• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.62
• /
• pp.113-132
• /
• 2014

Judicial decisions make it clear that in all CIF, CFR and FOB contracts, incorporation of charter party into sale contracts is the only effective way for recovery of demurrage in the context of sale contracts. The case law would appear to clarify a number of important issues: The words of incorporation in the sale contract play a vital role in determining the extent of the influence of the charter party principles over the sale contract. Hence, unless it is expressly provided otherwise, the courts tend to apply the charter party principles to the incorporated charter party provisions to the extent that they make sense in the context of sale contract, and that they do not undermine the underlying foundations of international trade law. In this respect the courts also take into account the factual background of the case with a view to objectively ascertaining the intention of the parties. The law is, however, less clear on the effects of the incorporated charter party provisions in sale contracts. There is still no straightforward answer to the question of to what extent the charter party law is applied to the incorporated charter party provisions in the context of sale contracts. The case law on this matter merely provides piecemeal solutions, and it is not possible to extract a general rule which will help interpretation of those charter party provisions which have not yet been subject to litigation or arbitration. Therefore, it should be noted that the parties would prepare Incorporation Clause in their sale contracts in reliance of the rules to achieve the desired results.

• Journal of Korea Trade
• /
• v.27 no.3
• /
• pp.43-64
• /
• 2023

Purpose - This paper studies whether CISG can be a suitable governing law for pure service contracts. When CISG was first drafted, there was little disagreement on the fact that contracts for the sale of goods and those for the provision of services were two different types of contract. Based on this understanding, CISG explicitly provides that the Convention will apply to contracts where the preponderant part of the contractual obligation is on the sale of goods, not services. However, as more sales transactions have come to include more elements of services, mainly due to the advancement of the IoT industry, the distinction between goods and services became more blurred. Based on the observation of recent changes, some scholars even argue that such a change supports the applicability and suitability of CISG to even pure service contracts. The purpose of this paper is to critically analyze and evaluate their argument. Design/methodology - This paper focuses on two separate but related issues: CISG's 'applicability' and 'suitability' to service contracts. For the first issue, this paper will examine the rules of interpretation of international treaties under the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties of 1969, and will apply its rules to find the proper answer. For the second issue, this paper will perform logical and empirical analyses on the reasoning employed by scholars claiming the suitability of CISG to service contracts. Findings - This paper concludes that CISG does not, and should not, apply to pure service contracts. The argument that CISG applies to pure service contracts directly contravenes Article 3(2) of the Convention, which expressly states that it does not apply to a contract wherein the preponderant part of its obligation is about services rather than sales. Similarly, CISG is not a suitable governing law for pure service contracts because it aims provide rules specifically tailored to the needs of transactions of sales of goods, not services. Servitization of sales of goods transaction does not change this conclusion. Originality/value - This paper presents different views from those offered by some eminent scholars on the issue of applicability and suitability of CISG to service contracts. By doing so, it is hoped that the confusion caused in discussions so far are clarified. Hopefully, this paper can also provide practical guidance to practitioners engaged in the fields of international sales, services, and IoT industries.