학술논문
멀티도어코트하우스제도: 기원, 확장과 사례분석
이용수 11
- 영문명
- The Multi-door Courthouse: Origin, Extension, and Case Studies
- 발행기관
- 한국중재학회
- 저자명
- 정용균(Yongkyun Chung)
- 간행물 정보
- 『중재연구』 제28권 제2호, 3~43쪽, 전체 41쪽
- 주제분류
- 사회과학 > 무역학
- 파일형태
- 발행일자
- 2018.06.30
7,720원
구매일시로부터 72시간 이내에 다운로드 가능합니다.
이 학술논문 정보는 (주)교보문고와 각 발행기관 사이에 저작물 이용 계약이 체결된 것으로, 교보문고를 통해 제공되고 있습니다.
국문 초록
영문 초록
The emergence of a multi-door courthouse is related with a couple of reasons as follows:
First, a multi-door courthouse was originally initiated by the United States government that increasingly became impatient with the pace and cost of protracted litigation clogging the courts. Second, dockets of courts are overcrowded with legal suits, making it difficult for judges to handle those legal suits in time and causing delays in responding to citizens complaints. Third, litigation is not suitable for the disputant that has an ongoing relationship with the other party. In this case, even if winning is achieved in the short run, it may not be all that was hoped for in the long run. Fourth, international organizations such as the World Bank, UNDP, and Asia Development Bank urge to provide an increased access to women, residents, and the poor in local communities.
The generic model of a multi-door courthouse consists of three stages: The first stage includes a center offering intake services, along with an array of dispute resolution services under one roof. At the second stage, the screening unit at the center would diagnose citizen disputes, then refer the disputants to the appropriate door for handling the case. At the third stage, the multi-door courthouse provides diverse kinds of dispute resolution programs such as mediation, arbitration, mediation-arbitration (med-arb), litigation, and early neutral evaluation. This study suggests the extended model of multi-door courthouse comprised of five layers: intake process, diagnosis and door-selection process, neutral-selection process, implementation process of dispute resolution, and process of training and education. One of the major characteristics of extended multi-door courthouse model is the detailed specification of individual department corresponding to each process within a multi-door courthouse.
The intake department takes care of the intake process. The screening department plays the role of screening disputes, diagnosing the nature of disputes, and determining a suitable door to handle disputes. The human resources department manages experts through the construction and management of the data base of mediators, arbitrators, and judges. The administration bureau manages the implementation of each process of dispute resolution. The education and training department builds long-term planning to procure neutrals and experts dealing with various kinds of disputes within a multi-door courthouse. For this purpose, it is necessary to establish networks among courts, law schools, and associations of scholars in order to facilitate the supply of manpower in ADR neutrals, as well as judges in the long run.
This study also provides six case studies of multi-door courthouses across continents in order to grasp the worldwide picture and wide spread phenomena of multi-door courthouse.
For this purpose, the United States and Latin American countries including Argentina and Brazil, Middle Eastern countries, and Southeast Asian countries (such as Malaysia and Myanmar), Australia, and Nigeria were chosen. It was found that three kinds of patterns are discernible during the evolution of a multi-door courthouse model.
First, the federal courts of the United States, land and environment court in Australia, and Lagos multi-door courthouse in Nigeria may maintain the prototype of a multi-door courthouse model. Second, the judicial systems in Latin American countries tend to show heterogenous patterns in terms of the adaptation of a multi-door courthouse model to their own environments. Some court systems of Latin American countries including those of Argentina and Brazil resemble the generic model of a multi-door courthouse, while other countries show their distinctive pattern of judicial system and ADR systems. Third, it was found that legal pluralism is prevalent in Middle Eastern countries and Southeast Asian countries. For example, Middle Eastern countries such as Saudi Arab
목차
Ⅰ. 서 론
Ⅱ. 멀티도어코트하우스 제도와 확장
Ⅲ. 멀티도어코트하우스 사례분석
Ⅳ. 함 의
Ⅴ. 결 론
키워드
해당간행물 수록 논문
- 한국 긴급중재인 제도의 긴급성과 집행력에 관하여
- The Role of Arbitration in the Influence of Organizational Intangible Power on Work Commitment and Conflict
- 중국 해협양안 중재센터(海峡两岸仲裁中心) 중재규칙의 특징과 남북상사중재위원회 중재규칙 제정의 시사점
- The Integrity of Finality of International Arbitral Awards: International Commercial and ICSID Arbitration Awards
- 소비자피해구제제도로서 소비자중재에 관한 연구
- A Study on the Development of the Arbitration System based on the Prosecution and Police Investigation Mediation Right
- 소비자중재조항과 집단중재(Class Arbitration)에 관한 미국법원의 판결동향
- On the Possibilities and Limitations of Arbitration Punishment
- 중재인의 고지의무와 합리적 조사의무 - 일본 최고재판소 2017년 12월 12일 결정을 중심으로 -
- A Review of Counterfeit Artwork Controversies and Civil Case Practices
- 인터넷을 통한 국제소비자거래에서의 분쟁 해소방안 - ODR을 통한 분쟁해결방안을 중심으로
- 블록체인 기술을 이용한 학교문서위조 예방모델의 연구
- KCAB’s Arbitration of U.S. Patent Exhaustion Disputes Over Artificial Intelligence and Internet of Things Technologies
- 최근의 EU 회원국간 양자투자협정과 투자자-국가 분쟁 동향 - Achmea BV v. Slovakia 사건을 중심으로 -
- 멀티도어코트하우스제도: 기원, 확장과 사례분석
- 대형마트 종사자에 대한 서비스교육, 조직지지 및 중재 지원이 감정노동 업무성과에 미치는 영향에 관한 연구
참고문헌
관련논문
사회과학 > 무역학분야 BEST
더보기사회과학 > 무역학분야 NEW
- 기술혁신형 중소기업에 대한 정부의 복합적 연구개발 지원 성과에 관한 연구
- A Study on Trade Credit Financing:Evidence from Chinese A-share Listed Companies
- 한국과 대만 상장기업의 ESG 활동이 경영 성과에 미치는 영향에 관한 탐색적 연구
최근 이용한 논문
교보eBook 첫 방문을 환영 합니다!
신규가입 혜택 지급이 완료 되었습니다.
바로 사용 가능한 교보e캐시 1,000원 (유효기간 7일)
지금 바로 교보eBook의 다양한 콘텐츠를 이용해 보세요!