製造物責任紛爭을 위한 ADR(재판외 분쟁처리)제도의 활성화 방안

• 영문명: A Study on the Activation of ADR(Alternative Dispute Resolution) System for the Product Liability Dispute
• 발행기관: 중앙대학교 법학연구원
• 저자명: 延基榮(Yeun, Kee-Young)
• 간행물 정보: 『법학논문집』法學論文集 第32輯 第2號, 7~42쪽, 전체 36쪽
• 주제분류: 법학 > 법학
• 파일형태: PDF
• 발행일자: 2008.12.31

영문 초록

Strict products liability is liability in tort for harm caused by defective products without any necessity for the plaintff to show fault on the part of the defendant. The American Greenmann v. Yuba Power case is of major importance in the development of Srict Liability doctrine for the defective product. After this case, most American jurisdictions have adopted the verson of strict tort liability contained in section 402A of the Restatement (Second) of Torts which was first drawn up by the American Law Institute in 1965. Propsals for a European Community Diretive on Products liability were first considered in the 1970s and after slow progress, finally led to the adoption by the Member States of the present Directive in 1985. The Directive provides in its first article that 'producer shall be liable for damage caused by a defect in his product'. This Directive was the first significant attempt to achieve the harmonisation of an area of private law at Community level. Now, All Member States of EU have adopted legislation incorporating the Directive into their national legal systems. Jananese Product Liability Act 1994 and Korean Product Liability Act 1999 have adoped the strict liability doctrine as well as EC Directive 85/374 and the American Restatement of Tort 1965. For the resolution of products liability cases, many countries use ADR system. Especially with the introduction of strict liability, many dispute resolution centers in the field of product liability have been set up and begun opertions in Japan. ADＲ has the potential of being guick and less expensive in the procedural phase. ADR is easily accessible to the parties and removes various impediments in access to legal remidies. In Japan, there are two types of ADR organizations for Products Liability. One is that of the national Consumer Center and local Consumer Centers, which deal with product complaints, the other is that of the Product Liability Centers that take care of extended damages and harm caused by defective products. Many Producers tend to think that such compromise is not un reasonable for maintaining their reputation and goodwill, partly because the monetary amount in dispute with consumers is often very small. PL centers can be appreciated as an attempt to build a structure that enables the fair resolution of disputes, based on law and facts, by providing a new and scientifically natural service for investigating the cause. Finally, in this paper I would like to introduce a new ADR system focusing on the Japanese organizations for the products liability disputes(PL centers and Cause Investigating Organizations).

목차

Ⅰ. 들어가는 말

Ⅱ. 제조물책임법의 시행과 분쟁예방 및 분쟁해결의 방법

Ⅲ. 외국에 있어서 제조물책임관련 재판외 분쟁해결(ADR)제도의 현황

Ⅳ. 일본 소비생활용제품 PL센터의 역할과 기능

Ⅴ. 한국의 제조물책임관련 ADR기관의 실태와 문제점

Ⅵ. 결론: 피해구제를 위한 ADR제도의 활성화 방안

참고문헌

Abstract

키워드

제조물책임(Products Liability) 결함제조물(Defective Product) 엄격 책임(Strict liability) 위험책임(Liability for Danger) 무과실책임(Gefaerdungshaftung) 결함책임(Liability without Fault) 재판외분쟁 해결(Liability for Defective Product) ADR(ADR) 원인규명기관(Cause Investigating Organizations) 소비자보호(Consumer protection) 소비자분쟁조정위원회(Consumer Despute Arbitration Committee) PL센타(PL Center) 제조상 결함(manufecturing defect) 설계상결함(design defect) 개발도상의 결함(development risk) 지시 경고상 결함(warning defect)