Posts Tagged ‘Expert Witness Korea courts’

« Older Entries

Apple vs. Samsung Legal Battle Timeline

Saturday, August 6th, 2011
Apple vs. Samsung Legal Battle Timeline

By Don Southerton, KoreaLegal.org Editor

Time for an update on the Apple-Samsung IP battle. International Business Times provides a great timeline.

In one of the tech world’s biggest lawsuits, Apple Inc. has sued Samsung Electronics for copying the aesthetics of its iPad tablet and iPhone.

Both Samsung and Apple entered into a legal battle over patent infringement back in April. Samsung counter sued Apple in four countries on three different continents. There is no compromise in sight between the giants. The legal battle is likely to carry on, which could result in a loss of millions of dollars to settle each claim in the court.

Here is the timeline of the legal battle which began in April 2011.

April 15, 2011 – Apple Inc., based in Cupertino, Calif., files a patent suit against its Korean rival Samsung, claiming it had copied the “look and feel” of the iPhone, iPod Touch and iPad for its Galaxy smartphones and tabs. Apple lays out a total of 16 claims covering software and hardware.

April 21 – Samsung files a lawsuit in the Seoul Central District Court, South Korea, against Apple citing five patent infringements. Samsung also filed a suit in a court in Tokyo, Japan citing two patent infringements, and in Mannheim, Germany citing three patent infringements.

April 28 – Besides suing Apple in three countries on two continents, Samsung also countersues Apple in the Northern District of California against Apple’s infringement of 10 patents.

June 22 – Samsung loses its bid. It earlier appealed to the federal judge in the U.S. to turn over samples of Apple’s iPads and iPhones in the future.

June 24 – In the ongoing battle, Apple issues rival Samsung with yet another new lawsuit in its home country, South Korea. Apple claims that Samsung has reproduced the look and feel on its Galaxy smartphones.

July 2 – Apple files a U.S. trade complaint seeking to block imports of Samsung’s Galaxy S mobile phone and Galaxy Tab computer.

July 5 – Apple seeks to ban U.S. imports of Samsung’s smartphones and tabs, through the U.S. International Trade Commission, a body known for its quick decisions.

July 9 – Apple and Samsung argue over the preliminary mandate. Apple wants it to be on Aug. 5, and later changes it to Sept. 8, since Judge Lucy Koh feels the August date is too early. Samsung suggests an earliest possible hearing date of Oct. 14, 2011.

July 12 – Samsung raises the issue of conflict of interest with regard to the treatment of privileged and confidential information gathered in the past. Therefore, Samsung asks the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California to disqualify Apple’s outside lawyers from the litigation. Samsung looks forward to a court hearing on this, around Aug. 18, 2011.

August 2 – A U.S. trade panel responsible for patent disputes agrees to investigate Apple’s complaint that its intellectual property has been stolen by Samsung.

Apple vs. Samsung Legal Battle Timeline

Tags: , , , , , , ,
Posted in News | No Comments »

Lone Star-KEB Deal Stalled

Friday, March 18th, 2011
Lone Star KEB Deal Stalled

By Don Southerton, KoreaLegal.org Editor

In my previous post, I noted that although some legal issues lingered, it seemed that the Lone Star KEB deal would soon be completed. Not so it seems. In fact, things might unravel.   Korea Times paints four scenarios.

 

FSC’s ‘on-hold’ call to cause investors to raise eyebrows
By Kim Tae-gyu 

Lone Star KEB Deal StalledThe Financial Services Commission (FSC) decided to delay a decision on two key issues that stand in the way of Hana Financial Group’s acquisition of the Korea Exchange Bank (KEB) from Lone Star Funds Wednesday.
The points at hand are whether Lone Star legally became the majority stakeholder in KEB and approval for the deal itself.

The FSC’s latest decision came with the markets watching whether the Korean government had been stalling for seven years without acting on Lone Star’s legal qualifications.

It can be taken either as a case of bureaucratic ineptitude, the very tendency that ends up stunting the growth of private enterprises, or a case of public servants’ prudence. Either way, the decision could entail unexpected consequences.

There are four possible scenarios over the future of the Korea Exchange Bank (KEB) as a result of the FSC’s delayed decision.

In the worst-case scenario at least for Hana Financial, the delay may kill the deal to buy KEB for 4.7 trillion won ($4.2 billion) from Lone Star Funds, agreed on in November.

This would mark an abrupt turnaround since approval from the Financial Services Commission (FSC) has been widely expected.

Yet, things changed on March 10 when the Supreme Court overturned a lower court’s ruling over Paul Yoo or Yoo Hoi-won’s alleged false disclosure to manipulate stock prices of KEB’s credit card unit in 2003 to deflate its acquisition prices.

As a result Yoo, an erstwhile head of Lone Star’s unit here, is to face a protracted court battle.

If he is eventually found guilty, Lone Star would be not eligible as the single-largest shareholder of KEB as the relevant law stipulates an entity found guilty of a financial crime in the previous five years cannot hold a major stake in a financial company.

Obviously affected by this verdict, the FSC delayed a decision on whether Lone Star was eligible to become the biggest shareholder of KEB. It did not even discuss the approval of the Hana-Lone Star deal.

Doubts are springing up that the sale of KEB will not go ahead because both Hana Financial and Lone Star can walk away if it is not completed by May.

Market observers say the two most significant factors are the court verdict and the decision of the FSC.

The former would take time with Lone Star possibly resorting to a petition to the Constitutional Court. Accordingly, the FSC is likely to play a key role with regard to the KEB’s future.

All four scenarios center around the decisions of the FSC: Is Lone Star an eligible shareholder of KEB and will it give the green light to the Hana-Lone Star deal?

Eligible, hence ok the deal

The FSC seems to think there were no problems in Lone Star taking over KEB in 2003.

Critics have claimed that the Texan private equity fund is a non-financial company, which is not allowed to snap up banks under Korean law. But the FSC said this was not the case.

Excluding the lingering legal disputes, FSC standing commissioner Choi Jong-ku told reporters after the FSC meeting that Lone Star is allowed to own KEB.

After reviewing various legal claims, the FSC may conclude that Lone Star is eligible to own KEB. Then it will be able to approve the Hana-Lone Star contract.

Yet the FSC will have to consider that its measures might conflict with those of the courts.

Lone Star KEB Deal Stalled

Not eligible, hence scrap the deal

Should the FSC deny Lone Star’s eligibility and refuse to endorse the sale, the contract will be scrapped. This would be the worst-case scenario for Lone Star as it might have to sell off its 51-percent stakes at market prices.

Then the fund would receive in the neighborhood of 3 trillion won instead of 4.7 trillion won as agreed with Hana, the price including the so-called management right premium.

This is what the trade union contends is the right solution.

“The gist of the highest court’s ruling is that Lone Star is not eligible as the largest KEB shareholder. Subsequently, the FSC is required to follow it,’’ KEB trade union spokesman Kim Bo-heon said.

“Along the same lines, the Hana-Lone Star contract should be jettisoned. Then, Lone Star should sell the shares at market prices.’’

Not eligible, but ok the deal

If an entity is classified as ineligible as the shareholder of a bank, it has to offload its stock.

Some argue that the FSC may be able to find a solution in denying Lone Star’s eligibility while approving the KEB deal, which would still lead Lone Star to sell off its shares.

The KEB trade union has vowed to go on strike if the FSC approves the deal. It already held union ballots where 96 percent of its members voted for walkouts.

“If the eligibility of the largest shareholder is denied, it means that Lone Star is not supposed to manage KEB. So, it has to be deprived of management right premium in disposing of its shares,’’ Kim said.

“It can take only the market prices for its stocks. Otherwise, the FSC will come under criticism that it has given special treatment to Hana since its head is close to President Lee Myung-bak.’’

Hana Financial Group Chairman Kim Seung-yu is a long-time friend of President Lee. Both studied business administration together at Korea University.

No decision

The final possibility is that the FSC will not draw any conclusions on either issue. The regulator might say that it plans to wait for the final court ruling no matter how long it takes.

Then, the KEB deal is unlikely to go ahead since the chances are that both Hana and Lone Star would not wait indefinitely.

Those involved in the contract would not be happy with this scenario as conventional beliefs show that “The worst decision is not to make any decision on immediate topics.’’

But this is somewhat implausible in consideration of the FSC leadership. Its Chairman Kim Seok-dong tends not to take a wait-and-see approach when he has a significant task.

Source: Korea Times

 

 

 

 

 

Lone Star KEB Deal Stalled

Tags: , , , , , , ,
Posted in News | No Comments »

Korean High Court Acknowledges Correlation Between Smoking and Lung Cancer

Saturday, February 19th, 2011
Korean High Court Acknowledges Correlation Between Smoking and Lung Cancer

By Don Southerton, Editor KoreaLegal.org

Tobacco lawsuits have a long history in the U.S. and West.  Smoking although more than popular in Korea has drawn attention in the wake of the country’s Well-being trend.  This recent court decision echos early efforts to bring lawsuit against Big Tobacco in the American South. The Seoul High Court ruled that there was considerable correlation between smoking and lung cancer.

Big Tobacco on the Dock

A meaningful ruling came out yesterday in a lawsuit filed by a group of smokers against Korea Tomorrow & Global (formerly Korea Tobacco & Ginseng), which manufactures and sells tobacco products. The Seoul High Court ruled that there was considerable correlation between smoking and lung cancer. It added that the plaintiffs had been smoking for a long period of time and suffered lung cancer, acknowledging the epidemiological relevance.

The ruling is the first-ever confirmation of the common knowledge that smoking increases the risk of lung cancer. The appeals court overruled a lower court’s ruling that there was no evidence that proved the plaintiffs suffered from lung cancer as a result of smoking. If the Supreme Court upholds the ruling, it may cause huge repercussions as the decision provides legal grounds for many smokers with lung cancer to file separate lawsuits against tobacco companies.

The appeals court, however, upheld the lower court’s ruling that KT&G was not liable for compensation because the plaintiffs failed to prove that KT&G was involved in illegal practices in the course of manufacturing and selling tobacco.

In other words, the court didn’t agree with the plaintiffs’ argument that the government and KT&G attempted to deceive customers by covering up the dangers of tobacco and mislead them with sales gimmicks, such as calling several tobacco brands “light” or “mild” to make them appear less harmful to the health.

The harmful effects and nicotine addiction have been proven through medical research. As a result, an avalanche of lawsuits were filed not only by individuals or groups but also by health insurance companies and governments in the United States. In 1998, a state government in the U.S. won a lawsuit against tobacco companies and landed a whopping amount of compensation – $246 billion – through a so-called Mass Settlement Agreement. The family of a smoker who died from lung cancer also won a lawsuit against Phillip Morris and received $80 million as punitive compensation.

The victory of KT&G, however, does not grant it immunity from being responsible for causing health problems. It is regrettable that KT&G refused to accept the court’s arbitration plan demanding the company establish a public foundation to alert smokers to health risks.

The central and local governments should also do their bit by increasing the bans on smoking in public places.

Source: JoongAng Daily

Korean High Court Acknowledges Correlation Between Smoking and Lung Cancer

Tags: , , , , , , , ,
Posted in News | No Comments »

2011 Trends and Expectations—A Commentary on Korean Global Business

Friday, January 7th, 2011
2011 Trends and Expectations—A Commentary on Korean Global Business

For a full text of the report CLICK HERE

2011 Trends and Expectations—A Commentary on Korean Global Business

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Commentary | No Comments »

Franchise Korea

Monday, November 1st, 2010
Franchise Korea

By Don Southerton, Editor

I wear many hats. I see myself as an author, global cross-cultural expert, historian, and legal consultant / expert witness. That said, my core work centers on providing strategy, consulting, coaching, and insights into Korea-facing global business.

Most recently, my company Bridging Culture Worldwide is supporting the launch of a number of franchises in Korea and Asia-Pacific. We also represent some top American and UK retail brands, which we seek to license in Korea.

Regarding our franchise efforts… International franchising typically involves the mother company working with a local “master franchisee”–often called a “regional developer.” This master franchisee/ regional developer can either be a 100% subsidiary of the mother company or a joint venture company with a local partner.

In turn, the local company  can either operate company owned locations or may also rely on “sub-franchisees” for running franchise outlets, which are owned and operated by an independent person or entity – a pure sub-franchisee.

In working with its clients, BCW’s key role is bridging cross-cultural issues, providing sound market entry strategy, finding qualified partners, and securing solid licensing and franchise agreements.  We understand Korea and what it takes to succeed.

For a great summary of Korean Franchise Laws    CLICK HERE

For more information, contact  Dsoutherton@bridgingculture.com

Franchise Korea

Tags: , , , , , , ,
Posted in Commentary | No Comments »

Korean Companies Desire Foreign Law Firms Services

Wednesday, June 30th, 2010
Korean Companies Desire Foreign Law Firms Services

By Don Southerton, KoreaLegal.org Editor
When Korea opens its legal services market to foreign firms some Korean companies might turn to foreign law firms—especially in specialized areas.  This comes as no surprise to those who follow the dynamics of the Korean legal system. Many feel opening the market will encourage competitiveness, reduce fees to clients, and improve service.

The article notes…
Major domestic companies has given Korean law firms 79 out of 100 points for competitiveness, and 83 percent of the companies say they could turn to foreign law firms should Korea’s legal market be opened.

The Dong-A Ilbo polled 50 large domestic corporations, state-run companies and financial institutions and 18 major law firms on the competitiveness of Korean law firms in response to the opening of the Korean legal market.

On whether they would turn to foreign law firms after the market’s opening, 71.4 percent or 35 of the legal departments of the 50 companies said they would do so for “certain sectors.” Just five companies (16.3 percent) said no.

On which sector will be the most affected by the opening, 13 law firms said the financial sector and six firms said the corporate sector, including mergers and acquisitions and fair trading. This indicates that foreign law firms will gain ground in the domestic market for legal services in finance and business, where they have a competitive edge.

Korean Companies Desire Foreign Law Firms Services

Tags: , , , , , ,
Posted in News | No Comments »

South Korea Ponders Move Towards U.S.-style Grand Jury System

Sunday, June 20th, 2010
South Korea Ponders Move Towards U.S. style Grand Jury System

By Don Southerton, Editor KoreaLegal.org

South Korea’s legal system has evolved over the past decades. Once rooted in Neo Confucian tradition, as Korea opened to the West they adopted much from Europe.  This WSJ article notes a mandate  to change, which includes, for example, a move towards the American-style grand jury system.

SEOUL—South Korea’s top prosecutor announced his support for the introduction of grand juries in the country, in what would be a major change to a legal system where power is concentrated with prosecutors.

The move is the most significant of the proposals announced Friday by Prosecutor General Kim Joon-gyu in response to a bribery and sex scandal involving about 100 current and former prosecutors in Busan, a city on South Korea’s southeast coast.

Mr. Kim proposed legislative changes to enact a U.S.-style grand jury system, a process that could take months, and said he would create citizens’ review panels for major cases in the meantime.

The decision could bring an advance in civil rights for South Korean individuals and a reduction in sometimes-abusive investigations of foreign businesses that have effectively been a trade barrier, analysts say.

For companies, South Korean prosecutors’ power has meant that simply being the target of an investigation can taint a reputation and damage business, even if no charges are brought. In the most high-profile such case in recent years, an attempt by the U.S. owner of Korea Exchange Bank to sell the institution was twice thwarted by a prolonged investigation into whether the company should have been allowed to buy the bank in the first place.

“It’s a paradigm shift,” says Jasper Kim, who teaches law in the international studies program at Ewha Women’s University in Seoul. “The question is in the execution, whether the grand juries function as simply a rubber stamp for prosecutors or as a bellwether test to a case.”

Prosecutors hold enormous power in South Korea’s justice system. Prosecutors, rather than police, preside over civil and criminal investigations. They decide whether to charge people with crimes, and don’t have to first prove the merit of the charges before a grand jury.

Prosecutors routinely disclose investigations to the media before charges are filed or trials are held, a practice that makes trials and court rulings less important for the public than an investigation.

The Busan scandal brought to a boil South Koreans’ long-simmering anger with prosecutors’ relatively unchecked power. In April, an investigation by South Korean TV network MBC turned up a construction-company executive who claimed to have systematically paid dozens of prosecutors for more than 20 years with cash, gifts, meals and prostitutes.

On June 9, the chairman of a special committee appointed to investigate the news report said some of the allegations were true. He recommended dismissal for a handful of prosecutors and financial penalties for others, though he didn’t recommend criminal charges because he found it difficult to link the payments to favors or other misconduct.

In a videoconference with 1,700 prosecutors nationwide on Friday, the prosecutor general, Mr. Kim, said the country needs a U.S.-style grand jury system for prosecutors to regain credibility. “The behavior of the prosecution will be revamped and those who do not follow the new trend will not keep their job,” Mr. Kim told the prosecutors.

South Korea’s legal system is rooted in communal practices that stretch back centuries, but it was modified 62 years ago with a civil-law-style system similar to France’s. The system instilled South Korean prosecutors with power and remained unchanged after the nation adopted a democratic constitution in 1987.

Abuses mounted through the years. In addition to occasional bribery scandals, prosecutors were widely perceived to be influenced by whatever political party held power. President Roh Moo-hyun, during his tenure from 2003 to 2008, sought to break the relationship between politicians and prosecutors and increase the role of judges as a check on prosecutors, but he stopped short of proposing a grand jury system.

WSJ Article Credit Evan Ramstad at evan.ramstad@wsj.com

South Korea Ponders Move Towards U.S. style Grand Jury System

Tags: , , , , , ,
Posted in News | 1 Comment »

Korean Law School Strives to Educate Koreans Students in U.S. Law

Sunday, May 23rd, 2010
Korean Law School Strives to Educate Koreans Students in U.S. Law

By Don Southerton, Editor KoreaLegal.org

I found this to be interesting. First the school is in Pohang, which is in southeast Korea and home to POSCO Steel. Second, it seems to be strongly supported by the Christian Legal Society, a non-denominational US-based Christian membership association of lawyers, judges, law professors, law students.

Joongang Ilbo notes
Although Handong International Law School in Pohang, North Gyeongsang, has a short history, it has made great strides toward educating Korean students in U.S. law and helping them to secure jobs overseas.

The school was established in 2002 by Handong Global University with the goal of providing an American-style law school curriculum and nurturing prospective attorneys who will practice in the United States.

Since then, of the 199 students who have graduated from Handong so far, 105 of them have passed bar exams in the United States.

In an interview with Eric Enlow, the dean of Handong International Law School, Enlow said that Handong is making remarkable progress, especially considering that an average of only 32 percent of bar exam applicants who were educated in countries other than the United States pass the U.S. bar exam.

“Fifty-three percent of our graduates have passed bar exams in seven U.S. states including Tennessee and Missouri,” Enlow said. “This is the first time that a Korean law school has produced more than 100 students who passed U.S. bar exams.”

Handong is the only university in Korea that offers and meets the academic requirements set forth by the American Bar Association, which accredits U.S. law schools.

Although the American Bar Association does not accredit foreign law schools outside of the United States and Canada, some states, such as Tennessee, permit the graduates of some foreign law schools to take their state bar exam. Other states, like New York, only allow graduates of foreign law schools who have completed an LL.M. degree at an accredited U.S. law school to take the bar exam.

“Those who have obtained a legal license to practice in the U.S. take jobs in various fields that would not usually be open to an attorney who passed the Korean bar exam,” Enlow said. “We have graduates working at the top five law firms in the U.S., such as Paul Hastings. And between 50 and 60 Handong graduates now work at eight law firms in Korea.”

While there are graduates who work in the legal departments of Korean companies, there are others who serve as legal advisers or attorneys at NGOs working on human rights issues, Enlow added.

Some graduates also get well-paying jobs without obtaining licenses in the United States, Enlow added.

Although Handong is located in the city of Pohang, which is outside of Seoul, Enlow explained the school is quite international. Over 20 percent of Handong International Law School students are foreigners and most of them are scholarship students from developing countries, he said.

“Three graduates work at Vietnamese law firms and a Jordanian graduate works as a United Nations High Commissioner,” he said.

All Handong classes are conducted in English and all put a heavy emphasis on in-class discussions, Enlow said.

“As Handong was established to nurture attorneys in the U.S., our curriculum is very similar to that offered in law schools in the United States, so that’s why states like Tennessee have permitted our students to take their bar exams,” Enlow said. “Students can study here, with a curriculum that is similar to that offered in U.S. law schools, at half the price.”

When asked whether he has any regrets about taking a position that pays him less than he would make as an attorney in the United States, Enlow, a Yale alumnus, said his income has changed drastically but that he had found meaningful work here based on his Christian faith.

Most of the school’s 12 faculty members are members of the Christian Legal Society and many consider teaching here as volunteer work.

“My wife and four children live here with me and my wife educates my children at home,” Enlow. “I’m satisfied with life here and I want to continue working here.”

Korean Law School Strives to Educate Koreans Students in U.S. Law

Tags: , , , , , ,
Posted in News | No Comments »

Korea Legal.org Update

Sunday, April 18th, 2010
Korea Legal.org Update

By Don Southerton, Korea Legal.org Editor

The site continues to draw lots of interest. We’re asking top experts to contribute  and share their perspective. Look for timely posting on a number of Korea-related legal and business issues.

Interested in contributing?

Please contact me at dsoutherton@bridgingculture.com

Korea Legal.org Update

Tags: , , ,
Posted in Announcement | No Comments »

OECD Cites Korea’s Restrictive Legal and Professional Services

Friday, March 12th, 2010
OECD Cites Koreas Restrictive Legal and Professional Services

By Don Southerton, Editor KoreaLegal.org

There is only one lawyer for every 5,891 people, compared to 268 in the U.S. 394 in the U.K. and 560 in Germany.

Chosun Ilbo recently noted that the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development in its annual Going for Growth report says Korea “implemented 558 regulatory reforms in the non-manufacturing sector during 2004-2007,” but recommends “promoting greater competition in services, especially in professional services.”

This is no surprise, one of the outcomes of the 1997 IMF Crisis was the opening of Korea to Foreign Direct Investment (FDI). International involvement in Banking, for example, is quite widespread. Not so with the legal sector. This however might change with the US Korea FTA and other pending FTAs.

Questions? Comments? Opinions? Please share.

BTW the article points out… First of all, there is a shortage of professionals such as lawyers and doctors in Korea’s service industry. There is only one lawyer for every 5,891 people, compared to 268 in the U.S. 394 in the U.K. and 560 in Germany. There is one accountant for every 3,950 people in Korea, compared to 895 in the U.S., 545 in the U.K. and 1,586 in Japan. The doctor-patient ratio is 1 to 580, the second highest among OECD member countries after Turkey.

Most fields of professional services are restricted to people with licenses, and the unlicensed are prohibited even from becoming partners who mainly provide money needed. It is also forbidden to open businesses in multiple locations, which has made it difficult for specialized service businesses to diversify and led to the emergence of many small private businesses, lowering the overall quality of services offered. Lawyers, certified public accountants and tax accountants are only allowed to hire holders of other licenses to serve as advisors, but not as partners.

In patent or tax legal cases involving several professional fields, clients must turn to big law firms providing all services or take the trouble to contact experts separately in each field. Also, patent agents are barred from handling patent-related lawsuits and tax accountants from playing proxy roles in tax disputes, requiring clients to turn to lawyers in all litigations.

The low supply and high barriers to entry have inevitably led to high fees for professional services. Eighty-five percent of small and medium-sized businesses in Korea cited high costs as the main reason why they avoided legal advisory services.

In the U.S., consumers can buy vitamins, analgesics and digestive tablets in supermarkets, but in Korea they need to go to pharmacies. This is just one illustration of the difficulties posed by the system.

It is consumers who suffer from such regulations and barriers existing due to the vested interests of those concerned and disagreements among government ministries. Once the Korea-U.S. free trade agreement is ratified, Korea will eventually have to open its service market. If the present situation continues, the country may then see the market dominated by foreign businesses.

OECD Cites Koreas Restrictive Legal and Professional Services

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in News | 1 Comment »

« Older Entries