Earticle

초록

영어

This study analyse the enlargement of personal scope in relation between an arbitral tribunal and the court under international transport contract with the English maritime cases. The reason for litigation rules permitting the consolidation of many different claims into one proceeding is clear; it is a question of resources and not of the will of the parties. However, the same is not true in arbitration. Public policy concerns about efficient use or allocation of resources do not apply in arbitration. If the parties want to conserve their resources, they can still do so, as arbitration is a voluntary method of dispute resolution based on the will of the parties. The reason for permitting consolidation in arbitration has to be justifiable within the framework of arbitration, not litigation. From time to time arbitrators will encounter problems in dealing with multi-party situations. Neither English law nor the law in force in most other jurisdictions provides an arbitral tribunal or the Court with a general power to ensure that, in a multi-party situation, two or more arbitrations will be considered by the same tribunal either at the same hearing or at immediately succeeding hearings to avoid the danger of inconsistent awards. In a chain contract (for example the chartering and sub-chartering of a ship), if one party in the chain makes a claim against its contractual partner, the latter will seek to pass on liability to a third, who could be its supplier in a sale of goods case or the head charterer in a charterparty case. With the expansion of arbitration as a dispute resolution mechanism came the pursuit of extension of arbitration agreements to ‘third parties’, attempts to enlarge the personal or substantive scope of agreements to arbitrate as well as discussions and examination of the interrelation of arbitration agreements with contract law and theories of consents. The personal scope of the arbitration agreement extends to its parties, and in certain limited circumstances, it may also extend to third parties.

목차

Abstract
 Ⅰ. 서론
 Ⅱ. 중재사안의 병합심리와 중재합의의 인적 범위
 Ⅲ. 판단모순과 중복심리의 방지
 Ⅳ. 중재판정부·법원 심리상 인적범위의 확장
 Ⅴ. 결론
 참고문헌

키워드

저자

• 한낙현 [ Nak-Hyun Han | 경남대학교 무역학과 교수 ] 제1연구자

참고문헌

발행기관

간행물

표지보기 관심저널 등록

• 간행물명

  무역통상학회지 [Journal of Korea Research Association of International Commerce]

• 간기

  격월간

• pISSN

  1738-4354

• 수록기간

  2001~2025

• 등재여부

  KCI 등재

• 십진분류

  KDC 326 DDC 380