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.