본문 바로가기
KERD
논문KCI 등재

A Review of Arbitrator Disclosure Obligations in Korea through the Oilhub Case

김준기
한국중재학회 (Korean Association Of Arbitration Studies(Kaas))|2020.09|중재연구 (JOURNAL OF ARBITRATION STUDIES)|제30권 제3호|pp. 115-136

0

조회

0

다운로드

1

인용

0

참고문헌

키워드

JapandisclosurechallengesarbitratorKCABdisqualificationsset asideKCAB Code of Ethics
주제분류무역학

초록

This article provides an overview of the state of affairs of arbitrator disclosure obligations in Korea. It shows how Korean courts will analyze arbitrator conflicts and obligations through an evaluation of Supreme Court judgments and a case-specific analysis of the recent Oilhub case and provides a comparative perspective through a review of recent Japanese case law. Although limited to domestic arbitrations, it assesses the various grounds that courts consider when determining impermissible arbitrator conflicts based on relations with parties and when an award might be set aside as a result. With the 2016 adoption of the KCAB Code of Ethics for Arbitrators and its rigorous standards, great clarity has been brought to the landscape. The Code of Ethics marks a significant milestone in enhancing the robustness of arbitrator disclosures and guaranteeing the fairness, integrity, and transparency of Korean arbitration practice and law.

Abstract

This article provides an overview of the state of affairs of arbitrator disclosure obligations in Korea. It shows how Korean courts will analyze arbitrator conflicts and obligations through an evaluation of Supreme Court judgments and a case-specific analysis of the recent Oilhub case and provides a comparative perspective through a review of recent Japanese case law. Although limited to domestic arbitrations, it assesses the various grounds that courts consider when determining impermissible arbitrator conflicts based on relations with parties and when an award might be set aside as a result. With the 2016 adoption of the KCAB Code of Ethics for Arbitrators and its rigorous standards, great clarity has been brought to the landscape. The Code of Ethics marks a significant milestone in enhancing the robustness of arbitrator disclosures and guaranteeing the fairness, integrity, and transparency of Korean arbitration practice and law.

참고문헌 (33)

  1. "Oilhub Korea Yeosu v Hyundai E&C and Byuksan Engineering, 2015 Na 25046, 2 September 2016 (Seoul High Court)", ~
  2. "Oilhub Korea Yeosu v Hyundai E&C and Byuksan Engineering, 2014 Gahap 20498, 19 August 2015 (Seoul District Court)", ~
  3. "Prem Warehouse LLC, et. al v Sanyo Electric Co., Ltd., et. al., Osaka High Court Decision, 11 March 2019, 2017 (Ra) No. 1552", ~
  4. "Prem Warehouse LLC, et. al v Sanyo Electric Co., Ltd., et. al., Osaka District Court Decision, 17 March 2015, 2014 (arb) No. 3", ~
  5. "Prem Warehouse LLC, et. al v Sanyo Electric Co., Ltd., et. al., Osaka High Court Decision, 28 June 2016, 2015 (arb) No. 547", ~
  6. "Prem Warehouse LLC, et. al v Sanyo Electric Co., Ltd., et. al., Supreme Court Decision, third petty bench, 12 December 2017, 2016 (leave) No. 43"[URL]
  7. "Prem Warehouse LLC, et. al v Sanyo Electric Co., Ltd., et. al., Osaka High Court, Decision, 11 March 2019, 2017 (Ra) No. 1552", ~
  8. Korean Commercial Arbitration Board, "International Arbitration Rules", ~ (2016)
  9. Korean Commercial Arbitration Board, "Domestic Arbitration Rules", ~ (2016)
  10. Korean Commercial Arbitration Board, "Code of Ethics for Arbitrators", ~ (2016)
  11. "2016 Annual Report"[URL]
  12. "2017 Annual Report"[URL]
  13. Bae, "Arbitration Law of Korea: Practice and Procedure" (2012), Juris
  14. Born, Gary, "International Commercial Arbitration" (2014), Kluwer
  15. Craig, W.L., "International Chamber of Commerce Arbitration" (2000), Oxford University Press
  16. Daele, Karel, "Challenge and Disqualification of Arbitrators in International Arbitration" (2012), Kluwer Law International
  17. Jang, Bok Hee, "Constitution of the Arbitral Tribunal and Arbitrator", 297 (2000)
  18. 정선주, "중재인에 대한 기피", 중재연구, 17(1), pp.33~55 (2007), 한국중재학회[DOI]
  19. Jung, Kyung Seok, "Defects in the Arbitrator Selection Procedure as a Reason for the Annulment of Arbitral Award", Human Rights and Justice, 308 (2002)
  20. Kim, Joongi, "International Arbitration in Korea" (2017), Oxford University Press
  21. Kim, Kap-You (Kevin), "Arbitration Law in Korea" (2016), Pakyoungsa
  22. 김경배, "중재인의 공정성과 독립성에 관한 연구", 중재연구, 18(1), pp.31~47 (2008), 한국중재학회[DOI]
  23. 김영주, "중재인의 고지의무와 합리적 조사의무 -일본 최고재판소 2017년 12월 12일 결정을 중심으로-", 중재연구, 28(2), pp.217~248 (2018), 한국중재학회[DOI]
  24. 이명우, "중재인의 기피에 관한 고찰", 중재연구, 13(2), pp.403~424 (2004), 한국중재학회
  25. Lim, Sungwoo(Sean), "International Arbitration" (2016), Pakyoungsa
  26. Maeda, Yoko, "Japanese Supreme Court’s First Decision On Arbitrator’s Non-disclosure" (2018), Kluwer Arbitration
  27. Mok, Young-Joon, "Authority, Responsibility and Exemption of an Arbitrator", Arbitration, 294 (1999)
  28. 오창석, "상사중재에 있어서의 중재인에 대한 시피사유와 중재인의 고지의무", 상사판례연구, 19(1), pp.353~388 (2006), 한국상사판례학회
  29. Ohara, Yoshimi, "Japan", Asia-Pacific Arbitration Review (2020)
  30. Ree, Dong Shin, "Arbitrator’s Disclosure Obligation to the Parties under Article 13(1) of the Arbitration Act and the Relation Between Request for Disqualification Under Article 14 and the Set Aside of Arbitral Awards", Commentaries on Supreme Court Decisions, 55 (2005)
  31. 신군재, "한․중․미 중재인의 선정 및 기피에 관한 비교연구", 중재연구, 21(1), pp.183~214 (2011), 한국중재학회[DOI]
  32. 신한동, "중재인의 고지의무에 관한 고찰 - 한국 대법원판례를 중심으로 -", 중재연구, 21(3), pp.3~20 (2011), 한국중재학회[DOI]
  33. 신승남, "미국법 상의 중재인의 고지 의무: 판례법상 명백한 편파성을 중심으로", 중재연구, 26(2), pp.45~66 (2016), 한국중재학회[DOI]

이 간행물의 다른 논문 (6건)

The Finality of Arbitral Awards: The U.S. Practices하충룡pp. 3-19Applicability of Mandatory Rules for Seafarer Protection손경한pp. 21-45"Belt and Road" and Arbitration Law Teaching and Education System Theory朱福勇pp. 47-66Enforcement of Arbitral Awards Incompatible with the Korean Procedural Framework임수현pp. 67-94'Artificial Intelligence' Acceptability in Online Dispute Resolution: A Comparison Study of Korean Age Groups정용균pp. 95-113
원문 보기