영국법상 기판력에 관한 연구

The doctrine of res judicata is recognized in all countries having judicial systems regardless of the civil law and common law countries since re-litigation of the same subject matter of an earlier conclusive adjudication is as good as denying the effect of judicial adjudication. Each country, however, has different system of res judicata. This article reviewed res judicata in England which show many differences from res judciata in Korea. Decisions made by statutory tribunals which are not judicial courts may have effects of res judicata in England and courts’ decisions made by the first instance have effects of res judicata and can be enforced because courts’ decisions are not finalized depending on appealability. In addition, though cause of action estoppel is similar to the objective scope of res judicata in Korea, it is different from Korea in that issue estoppel grants effects of res judicata on the issue leading to the adjudication that is not the result of the adjudication. Furthermore, the rule in Henderson v Henderson is very unfamiliar to us which precludes litigation of points that might have been and should have been included in earlier litigation between the same parties. On the other hand, academic researches in relation to recognition and enforcement of foreign judgements have focused on its requirements but not much attention has been given to the scope of res judicata of foreign judgements. This article is meaningful in that it provides foundation of such a future research.