Admiralty. Conflict of Laws. Jones Act Held Not to Apply to Suit by Danish Seaman Negligently Injured in Cuba against Danish Shipowner Where Ship's Articles Were Signed in New York

1953 ◽  
Vol 39 (6) ◽  
pp. 829
Keyword(s):  
New York ◽  
Author(s):  
Kim Joongi

This chapter focuses on the choice and enforcement of applicable law in arbitration agreements. In international arbitration cases, Article V(1)(a) of the New York Convention provides that the validity of an arbitration agreement should be first determined under the law to which the parties have subjected it or, failing any indication thereon, under the law of the country where the award was made. Hence, if the parties have not chosen the applicable law for an arbitration agreement, ‘the default rule’ is that the law of the place of arbitration shall apply. This chapter addresses the question as it applies to Korea and considers cases where conflict or a misapplication of the law is in effect. Moreover, it also covers several cases in which courts have applied the Act on International Private Law (AIPL), Korea’s conflict-of-laws statute, to determine the applicable law.


AJIL Unbound ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 110 ◽  
pp. 137-138
Author(s):  
Carlos M. Vázquez

The American Law Institute (ALI) has recently embarked on the project of elaborating a new Restatement of Conflict of Laws. Its first two Restatements on this subject have been enormously influential. The Ali began its work on the First Restatement in 1923, naming Joseph Beale of the Harvard Law School as its Reporter. Adopted in 1934, the First Restatement reflected the highly territorialist approach to the conflict of laws that had long prevailed in this country. Even before the First Restatement’s adoption, the First Restatement’s territorialist approach, and the “vested rights” theory on which it was based, was subjected to intense scholarly criticism. Nevertheless, the First Restatement’s approach continued to prevail in the United States until the New York Court of Appeals initiated a “choice-of-law revolution” in the early 1960’s with its decision inBabcock v. Jackson. Although most states have departed from the First Restatement’s approach, the First Restatement retains its adherents. Ten states continue to follow the First Restatement for tort cases and twelve states for contract cases.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document