CISG Case Analysis (Scaffold fittings case)
Dispute Background In 1994, an Austrian buyer and a Chinese seller agreed to a contract in which stated that the seller provide the buyer with 80,000 units of scaffold fittings with accordance to the sample that was reviewed before the signing and have the goods delivered to the buyer 's customer in England. When they arrived in England the buyer initiated an inspection with an independent inspection company as per the contract, and discovered that considerable part of the products did not conform to the sample. The buyer had to sell the goods partially to his customer at a lower price, sustaining considerable damages in the process.
The Austrian buyer thereafter filed a claim that there had been a lack of conformity of the goods which amounted to a fundamental breach, and an arbitral tribunal was held. The case history does not specify the identity of presiding arbitrators or any further details of the parties during the proceedings.
The tribunal found that there was a fundamental breach and held an arbitration award in favor of the Austrian buyer. No other domestic law or rules of private international law were applied. The details of the result of the proceedings are not stated and remain unclear, as arbitrary cases are confidential with respect to the parties ' decisions.
Key Issues of Dispute Regarding applicability -
It should be noted that in the original contract both parties did not specifically state which law should be applicable or whether to forego the application of CISG itself, per article 6 CISG, a fact that was mentioned by one of our team. As such, the arbitral tribunal held the CISG to be applicable to the contract in dispute, noting the fact that both countries of the parties were already members of the United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods, and also regarding the Article 1(1) of the CISG, “1. This Convention applies to contracts of sale of goods between parties whose places of business are
The Austrian buyer thereafter filed a claim that there had been a lack of conformity of the goods which amounted to a fundamental breach, and an arbitral tribunal was held. The case history does not specify the identity of presiding arbitrators or any further details of the parties during the proceedings.
The tribunal found that there was a fundamental breach and held an arbitration award in favor of the Austrian buyer. No other domestic law or rules of private international law were applied. The details of the result of the proceedings are not stated and remain unclear, as arbitrary cases are confidential with respect to the parties ' decisions.
Key Issues of Dispute Regarding applicability -
It should be noted that in the original contract both parties did not specifically state which law should be applicable or whether to forego the application of CISG itself, per article 6 CISG, a fact that was mentioned by one of our team. As such, the arbitral tribunal held the CISG to be applicable to the contract in dispute, noting the fact that both countries of the parties were already members of the United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods, and also regarding the Article 1(1) of the CISG, “1. This Convention applies to contracts of sale of goods between parties whose places of business are
References: CISG Case Presentation. URL : http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/947531i1.html CISG Annotated Table of Contents. URL : http://www.cisg.law.pace.edu/cisg/text/cisg-toc.html Guide to Article 74 - UNIDROIT Principles. URL : http://www.cisg.law.pace.edu/cisg/principles/uni74.html CISG and China. Ding Ding. Pace Law School Institute of International Commercial Law. January 2000. URL: http://www.cisg.law.pace.edu/cisg/biblio/dingding.html Interpreting or supplementing Article 35 of the CISG by using the UNIDROIT Principles of International Commercial Contracts and the Principles of European Contract Law. René Franz Henschel November 2004 URL: http://www.cisg.law.pace.edu/cisg/biblio/henschel.html