A. LEGISLATION, TRENDS AND TENDENCIES
A.1 Impending Amendments to the Korean Arbitration Act
Last year, we reported that a task force had been established by
the Ministry of Justice in Korea in 2012 to consider amendments
to the Korean Arbitration Act (the “Arbitration Act”). The task
force has since evolved into a special committee encompassing
arbitration practitioners, officials and academia. A draft bill
amending the Arbitration Act is likely to be introduced in 2014.
To date, committee discussions have centered on the extent to
which the Arbitration Act should embrace the UNCITRAL
Model Law’s 2006 amendments. It appears that an amended
Arbitration Act will adopt in whole or in part Option I (as
opposed to Option II) of Article 7 of the UNCITRAL Model
Law.3 The requirement that a “duly authenticated” or “duly
certified” copy of the award be submitted to the enforcing court,
which the UNCITRAL Model Law did away with in its 2006
amendments, may also be removed from the Arbitration Act.4
However, there are more divergent views within the special
committee as to the extent to which Korea should adopt such
2006 amendments of the UNCITRAL Model Law as Articles
17.H and 17.I. These involve recognition and enforcement of
tribunal-issued interim measures, including an expanded
mandate for interim measures and the Korean court’s discretion
and power to reformulate such measures.5 Separate potential
revisions to the Arbitration Act include whether to expand the
scope of arbitrable disputes beyond commercial disputes, and
whether to mandate protective measures for consumers or
employees who agree to arbitration clauses.