La construction de la propriété intellectuelle au Cambodge remonte à une date récente. Cetteconstruction se traduit, d’une part, par l’adoption d’un cadre juridique consacrant la notionjuridique de la propriété intellectuelle et, d’autre part, par l’élaboration des mécanismes deprotection de la notion consacrée.Comme la législation de la propriété intellectuelle a été adoptée pour assurer la conformité dudroit cambodgien aux exigences de l’OMC, il n’est pas surprenant de constater que la notion et lerégime juridique de la propriété littéraire et artistique et ceux de la propriété industriellecambodgiennes sont presque identiques à ceux qui sont prévus dans l’Accord ADPIC et dans lesTraités et Conventions administrés par l’OMPI. À cause des obstacles d’ordre juridique,économique et social, la plupart des lois cambodgiennes de la propriété intellectuelle ne connaitpas encore une application effective et correcte dans la pratique. En conséquence, la notion de lapropriété intellectuelle cambodgienne est très peu développée.Pour faire respecter le titre de propriété littéraire et artistique et celui de la propriété industrielle,les mécanismes légaux et judiciaires visant à prévenir les atteintes au droit exclusif dont disposentles titulaires du droit, à préserver les éléments de preuves et à réprimer des atteintes sont prévusdans la législation cambodgienne portant sur la propriété intellectuelle. Par ailleurs, le recours auxmodes alternatifs de règlements de litiges tels que l’arbitrage commercial, la médiation et laPreliminary Alternative Disputes Resolution est également possible. L’efficacité et l’effectivitéde la mise en oeuvre de ces mécanismes pour la protection de la propriété intellectuelle sur leterritoire cambodgien sont une question d’actualité. / The construction of intellectual property rights in Cambodia dates back to a recent time. This construction implies, on the one hand, the adoption of a specific legal framework that establishes the notion of intellectual property and, on the other hand, the elaboration of protection mechanisms of the established notion. As the legislation on intellectual property was adopted to ensure the conformity of Cambodian law with WTO requirements, it is not surprising that the notion and legal regime of literary and artistic property and that of industrial property are almost identical to what is provided under TRIPS Agreement and other Treaties and Conventions administered by the WIPO. Because of legal, economic and social barrier, most of Cambodian laws relating to intellectual property have not been effectively and correctly applied in practice. Consequently, the notion of intellectual property has not been well developed.To enforce the exclusive right of literary and artistic property and that of industrial property, the legal and judicial mechanisms aiming at preventing infringement, preserving the proofs and punishing the infringement are provided under Cambodian legislation relating to intellectual property. Moreover, utilization of alternative disputes resolutions mechanisms such as commercial arbitration, mediation and Preliminary Alternative Disputes Resolution, is also possible. The efficiency of these mechanisms for the protection of intellectual property in Cambodia is, however, a topical question.

國人「有土斯有財」之觀念濃厚，往往除了住的需求之外，更以購買不動產做為保存財富的重要方式。然而，不動產各別差異性很大，難以建立一個公開的市場，提供一般人所需的完整資訊，因此，在資訊不流通與不透明的情況下，極易產生資訊不對稱的問題，加上專業人士之素質良莠不齊，往往利用其掌握資訊之優勢，對於交易當事人隱藏重要資訊，甚至欺罔之行為等事件發生，致不動產交易紛爭案件層出不窮。 隨著社會經濟活動的變化，對於不動產的使用形態與權利類型也日益複雜，如果探討紛爭發生的原因及其處理方式時，僅著眼於規範的抽象內容與如何適用，往往比較不能得到想要的結果，因為就紛爭當事人而言，除了對於法律規範與事實之間的認知有所不同外，更重要的是如何妥善解決問題會比如何適用法律來得重要。 我國現今法制上之不動產仲介紛爭處理機制，除了循司法上之訴訟途徑外，尚可透過不同的訴訟外紛爭處理機制以謀求解決，惟多元的訴訟外紛爭處理機制，其本身之組織架構、處理程序及形成之法律效果並不相同，民眾對於應選擇何種之機制始可達成其訴求，以及現行法律制度下所提供之處理機制是否能夠有效妥適處理此類的紛爭，並不清楚，因此，本文嚐試從法律社會學的角度觀察我國法律對於不動產交易活動所進行的管制實際社會效果如何，並透過反思法的理論所提出之當今法律進化的特徵，提出我國在處理不動產仲介紛爭的法律制度設計上一些新的思考方向。 / Whereas the concept of " Possessing Property makes Wealth " is deeply in the heart of our people, in addition to the necessity for living, they buy real estates for preserving wealth as major practice. However, the conditions of real estate are varied, it is difficult to establish a public market to provide sufficient information, hence, under the situation of short of communication and transparency of data which is easy to cause information unsymmetrical. Moreover, the complicated backgrounds of Realtors who intend to hold their favorable materials to hide from the other parties and even commit fraud.....etc. So, real estate business causes conflicts frequently. In the wake of diversity of social economics activities, the application and rights and privileges of real estate also become more intricateness. If people explore the reason of conflict and disposal process just at the point of normative abstract content and applicable, it will always be unable to gain the ideal result. As to the dispute parties concerned, beside the different interpretation of the law and the fact, how to properly solve the problem is more important than the legal action. In our country, the present legal process for Realtor argument disposal, in addition to the judicial charges, people can seek other way to settle the dispute. Nevertheless, the multiform dispute disposal institutions which because of their corporate structures and disposal process different constitute discrepant legal result. What kind of system people should select to achieve their purpose and, whether the designated process under the present legal rules can solve the problem properly and effectively, people unclear. Therefore, this text is trying from the point of view of legal sociology, to observe that what is the substantial social effectiveness of real estate business operation under the control of our law and, through the characteristic specified by reflexive law of current law development, to introduce a new tendency to draw legal system to settle real estate Broker argument for our country.