All
| TITLE | Supreme Court Decision 2024Da24317 Decided January 23, 2025 【Unjustly Enriched Amount】 [full Text] |
|---|---|
| Summary | |
| 【Main Issues and Holdings】 [1] Method of interpretation of the intention of the parties expressed in a contract Whether this legal doctrine is likewise applicable to cases involving a contract that has multiple language versions or a single contract drafted in multiple languages (affirmative) [2] Standards for determining whether there is a so-called “exclusive arbitration agreement,” in which the parties agree to resolve a dispute not by the court’s judgment but through arbitration, and whether the fact that the parties instituted a separate clause on arbitration in a contract can serve as powerful evidence with which to presume the intention of the parties to settle a dispute through arbitration (affirmative) Whether an arbitration agreement is considered legally binding even if an arbitration clause does not expressly mention the arbitration institution, applicable law, or place of arbitration (affirmative with restriction) Whether the legal force of an arbitration agreement can be readily denied simply because there are some defects in an arbitration clause (negative) | |
