Peter & Kim

Legal Guidance and Research / Experts / Organisations / Peter & Kim

2 Experts

Clear all filter

1 Contributions by Peter & Kim Experts

Challenging Arbitral Jurisdiction in Korea: Court and Tribunal Powers, Set-Aside and Enforcement, and the Availability of Anti-Arbitration and Anti-Suit Injunctions
PRACTICE NOTES
Challenging Arbitral Jurisdiction in Korea: Court and Tribunal Powers, Set-Aside and Enforcement, and the Availability of Anti-Arbitration and Anti-Suit Injunctions
Introduction Korea has developed into an emerging arbitration hub in Northeast Asia over the past two decades, enjoying a well-earned status as an arbitration-friendly venue. The Korean Arbitration Act (KAA) provides the statutory backbone for arbitration in Korea. First enacted in 1966, it was comprehensively revised in 1999 to align with the UNCITRAL Model Law 1985, later adjusted in part to reflect the updates introduced by the UNCITRAL Model Law 2006, and amended again in 2020 to incorporate revisions arising from the Arbitration Industry Promotion Act. As one of the earliest Asian adopters of the UNCITRAL Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration, Korea has built a dependable legal regime for arbitral proceedings, making it a reliable place for arbitration in Korea. Korean courts are widely viewed as supportive of arbitration, upholding arbitration agreements between the parties and exercising restraint in
Arbitration
If you expected to see yourself on this page, click here.