Judgment of 14 February 1995
South Korea Supreme Court
XXI Y.B. Comm. Arb. 612 (1996)
- Written by Mary Katherine Cunningham, JD
Facts
Adviso NV (plaintiff) and Korea Overseas Construction Corporation (defendant) entered a contract containing an arbitration agreement. A dispute arose between the parties, and the parties referred the matter to arbitration before a tribunal in Zurich, Switzerland. The arbitral tribunal in Zurich entered an award awarding damages to Adviso NV. Adviso NV filed a lawsuit in South Korea, seeking enforcement. In September 1993, the Seoul Court of Appeals granted leave to enforce the award. The Seoul Court of Appeals acknowledged that the statute of limitation from the Netherlands Antilles applied by the arbitral tribunal was longer than the similar period under Korean law. However, the Seoul Court of Appeals found the difference in the statutes of limitations did not prevent enforcement of the award because the difference did not violate the public order of South Korea. The Seoul Court of Appeals also found that the arbitral tribunal appropriately determined it retained jurisdiction and that Adviso NV did not violate Korea’s principles of estoppel in certain assignments of rights. Korea Overseas Construction Corporation appealed to the Supreme Court of South Korea, arguing the Seoul Court of Appeals erred in applying Article V(2)(b) of the New York Convention.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Per curiam)
What to do next…
Here's why 815,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.