Intra-regional reform in East Asia and the new Hague Principles on Choice of Law in International Commercial Contracts

국문 초록 (Abstract)

지난 20년, 동아시아 역내 국가들은 국가 차원에서의 국제사법 개혁에 대해 점차 개방적인 모습을 보여 주었다. 한국은 2001년 시행된 『국제사법』의 개정을 통해 개혁의 선구자가 되었고, 일본은 2007년 발효된 『法の適用に?する通則法』을 통해 동일한 개혁의 발자취를 따랐다. 이후 중국도 상당한 진전을 보여주고 있다. 중국의 국제사법인 『涉外民事?系法律适用法』을 2011년 제정하였고, 최근 2013년 1월 7일부로 시행된 최고인민법원의 사법해석(1)에 의해 동법을 보충하였다.
이러한 발전의 관점에서, 학자들은 역내 및 국제적 관여를 촉진하기 위한 보다 많은 대화와 개혁을 요청해 왔다. 최근 한 학자는 동아시아 역내의 공통된 가치와 헤이그국제사법회의의 다양한 국제협약(international instruments)의 정신을 반영한 국제사법을 발전시켜야 함을 강조하였다. 이 통찰력 넘치는 견해는 헤이그국제사법회의가 동아시아 지역과 공유하는 오랫동안 지속된 유대관계를 반영하고 있다. 일본은 1957년 6월 헤이그국제사법회의의 회원이 되었고, 중국은 1987년 7월, 한국은 1997년 8월에 헤이그국제사법회의 의 회원이 되었다. 헤이그국제사법회의는 동아시아를 넘어 2012년 홍콩에 새로운 아태평양지역사무소를 개설하고 유라시아의 터키를 포함하여 싱가폴을 9번째 아시아의 헤이그국제사법회의 회원국으로 받아들일 준비를 함으로써 이 지역에서 그 존재감을 넓혀가고 있다.
아시아 국가들이 헤이그국제사법회에 많이 참여함으로써 아시아 지역의 필요에 보다 잘 대응하는 새로운 국제협약의 발전을 촉진시킬 것으로 기대한다. 이 논문은 그러한 국제협약의 하나로서 곧 승인될 예정인 새로운 국제상사계약의 준거법 결정에 관한 헤이그원칙(이하, “헤이그원칙”)을 검토한다. 헤이그원칙이 추구하는 바는 국제계약의 준거법 결정에 있어 당사자자치의 승인 및 제한과 관련한 현행 모범실무(best practice)의 국제적 규준(code)이 될 수 있도록 하는 데 있다. 이 논문은 헤이그원칙의 전개, 형식 및 범위와 헤이그원칙의 주석서에 대해 상설하고, 다방면의 모범실무 규정과 혁신적 규정을 소개한다. 또한 이 글은 한국, 중국 및 일본의 해당 국제사법 규정을 면밀히 검토한 후 헤이그원칙이 개별 국가 내지 동아시아 역내 차원의 개혁을 위한 유용한 도구가 될 수 있을 것인가에 대한 문제를 제기한다.

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

The last two decades have seen East Asian States evince an increasing openness to private international law reform at the national level. The Republic of Korea was the harbinger in this regard with Law Number 6465 of the Act amending the Conflict of Laws Act taking effect in 2001. Japan followed suit with the Act on General Rules for Application of Laws taking effect in 2007. The People’s Republic of China has since made significant advances. China’s Law on the Application of Law to Foreign-related Civil Relations entered into force in 2011 and has recently been supplemented by the Supreme People’s Court Interpretation I on the Foreign-related Civil Relations Law, which entered into force on 7 January 2013.
In light of these developments, commentators have called for further dialogue and reform with a view to facilitating increased intra-regional and international engagement. One commentator recently emphasised the importance of developing private international law rules reflecting common values in the region and doing so in parallel with various instruments of the Hague Conference on Private International Law. This prescient observation reflects the longstanding, enduring bond that the Hague Conference shares with the East Asian region. Japan became a Member of the Hague Conference in June 1957; China in July 1987 and the Republic of Korea in August 1997. Beyond East Asia, the Hague Conference has a growing presence in the Asia Pacific, highlighted by the opening of its new regional office in Hong Kong in 2012 and the recent membership of Singapore as the 9th Asian member of the Hague Conference (including Eurasian Turkey).
It is hoped that an increased participation of Asian States in the Hague Conference will facilitate the development of new instruments that are better adapted to the needs of the region. This article will examine one such instrument, the new Hague Principles on Choice of Law in International Commercial Contracts (“the Hague Principles”), the endorsement of which is expected shortly. The Hague Principles seek to serve as an international code of current best practice with respect to the recognition and limits of party autonomy in choice of law for international contracts. The article will detail the development, form and scope of the Hague Principles and their accompanying Commentary before exploring various best practice provisions and innovative provisions. It will offer a high-level comparison with the conflict of laws rules applicable in the Republic of Korea, China and Japan and, in doing so, raise the question of whether the Hague Principles may be a useful instrument for reform at a national or regional level within East Asia.

목차 (Table of Contents)

• INTRODUCTION
• DEVELOPMENT OF THE HAGUE PRINCIPLES
• FORM OF THE HAGUE PRINCIPLES
• SCOPE OF THE HAGUE PRINCIPLES
• TOWARDS A SOUND INTERNATIONAL STANDARD
• CONCLUDING REMARKS
• 《Abstract》
• 《국문초록》

참고문헌 (Reference)

1 Permanent Bureau, "“The Draft Hague Principles on Choice of Law in International Commercial Contracts”, submitted by the Permanent Bureau, Prel. Doc. No. 6 of March 2014 for the attention of the Council of April 2014 on General Affairs and Policy of the Conference" Hague Conference,

2 "“Feasibility study on the choice of law in international contracts–report on work carried out and preliminary conclusions”, Prel. Doc. No 22 A of March 2007" Hague Conference,

3 I. Radic, "“Feasibility study on the choice of law in international contracts–Special focus on international arbitration”, Prel. Doc. No 22 C of March 2007" No 22 C"),

4 "“Feasibility study on the choice of law in international contracts–Report on work carried out and conclusions”, Prel. Doc. No 5 of February 2008" Hague Conference,

5 T. Kruger, "“Feasibility study on the choice of law in international contracts–Overview and analysis of existing instruments”, Prel. Doc. No 22 B of March 2007" Hague Conference,

6 "ontract Law of the People’s Republic of China" National People’s Congress, 1999

7 "Wayman v. Southard, 23 US (10 Wheat.) 1" 1825

8 Salmon J., "Tzortzis v. Monark Line A/B [1968] 1 WLR 406, 413"

9 K. Anderson, "Translation of Japan’s Private International Law: Act on the General Rules of Application of Laws, Law No 10 of 1898 (as newly titled and amended 21 June 2006)" Asian-Pacific Law & Policy Journal 8 (1) : 138 ~, 2006

10 A. Dickinson, "Third-Country Mandatory Rules in the Law Applicable to Contractual Obligations: So Long, Farewell, Auf Wiedersehen, Adieu?" Journal of Private International Law 3 : 53 ~, 2007

11 K.H. Suk, "The New Conflict of Laws Act of the Republic of Korea" Yearbook of Private International Law 5 : 99 ~ 110, 2003

12 J. Neels, "Tacit Choice of Law in the Hague Principles on Choice of Law in International Contracts" De Jure Law Journal : 101 ~ 110, 2011

13 T. Kadner Graziano, "Solving the Riddle of Conflicting Choice of Law Clauses in Battle of Forms Situations: The Hague Solution" Yearbook of Private International Law 14, 2012

14 "Shamil Bank of Bahrain v. Beximco Pharmaceuticals Ltd [2004] EWCA Civ 291" 2004

15 "Revue critique du droit international privé : 198 ~" 1991

16 M. Giuliano, "Report concerning the convention on the law applicable to contractual obligations" OJEC (C 282) : 17 ~, 1980

17 S. Voegenauer, "Regulatory Competition through Choice of Contract Law and Choice of Forum in Europe: Theory and Evidence" European Review of Private Law 1 (13) : 24 ~ 25, 2013

18 B.A. Marshall, "Reconsidering the proper law of the contract" Melbourne Journal of International Law 13 (1), 2013

19 J. Fawcett, "Private international law, 14th ed" Oxford University Press : 691 ~, 2008

20 C. Fresnedo de Aguirre, "Party Autonomy–a Blank Cheque?" Uniform Law Review XVII (4) : 655 ~ 680, 2012

21 L.G. Radicati Di Brozolo, "Non-national Rules and Conflicts of Laws Reflections in Light of the Unidroit and Hague Principles" Rivista di diritto internazionale private e processuale (4) : 841 ~ 864, 2012

22 R. Michaels, "Non-State Law in the Hague Principles on Choice of Law in International Contracts"

23 L. Gama Jr., "Non-State Law in the (Proposed) Hague Principles on Choice of Law in International Contracts" 2011

24 K.H. Suk, "New Conflict of Laws Act of the Republic of Korea" Journal of Korean Law 1 (2) : 210 ~, 2001

25 "Musawi v. RE International (UK) Ltd [2007] EWHC 2981 (Ch) (14 December 2007) [2]" 2007

26 Y. Gan, "Mandatory Rules in Private International Law in the People’s Republic of China" Yearbook of Private International Law 14 : 305 ~ 321, 2012

27 M. Pauknerová, "Mandatory Rules and Public Policy in International Contract Law" Conference Paper delivered at the ERA Annual Conference on Private International and Business Law 11 (2010) : 29 ~, 2009

28 P. Francescakis, "Lois d’application immédiate et droit du travail" Revue critique du droit international privé 63 : 197 ~,

29 P. Lagarde, "Le dépeçage en droit international privé des contrats" Rivista Diritto Internazionale. Privato e Processuale. (1) : 649 ~, 1975

30 "Law on the Application of Law to Foreign-related Civil Relations of the People’s Republic of China" National People’s Congress 28, 2010

31 G. Droz, "La Conférence de La Haye de droit international privé : traités internationaux ou lois modèles ?" Revue Internationale de Droit Comparé : 507 ~ 521, 1961

32 Y. Nishitani, "Japanese and European Private International Law in Comparative Perspective" Mohr Siebeck, 2008

33 Q. He, "Interpretation I of the Supreme People’s Court on Certain Issues Concerning the Application of the ‘Law of the People’s Republic of China on Application of Law to Foreign-Related Civil Relations" The Chinese Journal of Comparative Law 2 (No 1), 2014

34 K.H. Suk, "Harmonization of Private International Law Rules in Northeast Asia" International Law Association of Japan Conference : 2 ~, 2013

35 Halpern, "Halpern v. Halpern [2007] EWCA Civ 291 (3 April 2007) [21]-[29]"

36 "Hague Conference"

37 "Guardianship of Infants (The Netherlands v. Sweden) (1958) 25 ILR 254" 1958

38 B. Audit, "Droit international privé, 5e éd (821) : 685 ~" 2008

39 Permanent Bureau of the Conference, "Diplomatic Conference on the law applicable to sales contracts" Proceedings of the Extraordinary Session of October 1985 (50-54) : 725 ~, 1987

40 S.Z. Tang, "Corruption in International Commercial Arbitration" Journal of Private International Law Conference, 2013

41 J.-M. Jacquet, "Contrats" Répertoire de Droit international : 13 ~, 2011

42 "Conférence de La Haye de droit international privé" Répertoire international Dalloz (15), 1998

43 P. Hay, "Conflict of Laws, 5th edition" West Publishing : 1131 ~ 1132, 2010

44 "Conclusions and Recommendations adopted by the Council on General Affairs and Policy of the Conference (31 March–2 April 2009)"

45 "Conclusions and Recommendations adopted by the Council on General Affairs and Policy of the Conference (31 March to 3 April 2008) 2"

46 "Conclusions and Recommendations adopted by the Council on General Affairs and Policy of the Conference (1-3 April 2008) 1"

47 P. Leibkücher, "Comments on the Supreme People’s Court’s Interpretation No. 1 on the Private International Law Act of the PRC" China-EU Law Journal : 201 ~, 2013

48 R. Garnett, "Co-existing and Conflicting Jurisdiction and Arbitration Clauses" Journal of Private International Law 9 (3) : 361 ~, 2013

49 S. Symeonides, "Choice of Law in the American Courts in 2013: Twenty-Seventh Annual Survey" American Journal of Comparative Law 62 : 63 ~ 64, 2014

50 Permanent Bureau of the Hague Conference on Private International Law, "Choice of Law in International Commercial Contracts: Hague Principles?" Uniform Law Review XV (3/4) : 895 ~, 2010

51 "Burchett v. MasTec North America Inc 322 Mont. 93, 93 P. 3d 1247" 2004

52 P. Nygh, "Autonomy in International Contracts" Clarendon Press : 58 ~ 60, 1999

53 "Art. 7 of the Resolution, Basel Session 1991" 1991

54 "Art. 7 of the Mexico Convention"

55 "Art. 7 of the Korean Conflicts Act"

56 "Art. 4 of the Rome I Regulation"

57 "Art. 3111(1) of the Civil Code of Quebec"

58 "Art. 3(1) of the Rome I Regulation"

59 "Art. 3 of the Rome I Regulation"

60 "Art. 3 of the Convention on the Law Applicable to Contractual Obligations of 19 June 1980 (80/934/EEC)" Rome Convention,

61 "Art. 28(1) of the 1985 UNCITRAL Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration" 1985

62 "Art. 27 of the Korean Conflicts Act"

63 "Art. 26(1) of Korean Conflicts Act"

64 "Art. 25(2) of the Korean Conflicts Act"

65 "Art. 21(1) of the International Chamber of Commerce Rules of Arbitration 2012" 2012

66 "Art. 1(2) of the Hague Convention of 30 June 2005 on Choice of Court Agreements" 2005 Hague Choice of Court Convention, 2005

67 "Art 4 of the Chinese Foreign-related Civil Relations Law"

68 "Art 10 of Chinese Interpretation I"

69 S.C. Symeonides, "American Private International Law" Kluwer Law International : 216 ~, 2008

70 "A. Ong Chinese Journal of International Law 8 (3) : 637 ~" 2009

71 W. Zhu, "A Plea for Unifying or Harmonizing Private International Law in East Asia: Experiences from Europe, America and Africa" first Private International Law Seminar in East Asia 269, 2010

72 "1924 International Convention for the Unification of Certain Rules of Law relating to Bills of Lading and Protocol of Signature"