• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

The 1980 United Nations convention on contracts for the international sale of goods.

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

THE 1980 UNITED NATIONS CONVENTION ON CONTRACTS FOR THE INTERNATIONAL SALE OF GOODS This paper will show that the UN Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods offers solutions to the increasing legal problems which arise when doing business in an international context. Firstly an overview will be given when the Vienna Convention applies and furthermore what remedies a seller has when there is a breach of contract. The UN Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods (CISG), also known as Vienna Convention, came into force on 1 January 1988 and is currently adopted by 62 countries.1 It is said to be one of the most successful Treaties in history.2 This Convention was promulgated by the UN Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL) and is a successor of the 1955 Hague Convention. The Vienna Convention has a prior claim of application in relationship to the Rome Convention. But both Conventions state that they 'do not prevail over international agreements' (Art.90 CISG) or 'shall not prejudice the application of international conventions' (Art.21 Rome Convention). However, as will be explained below, if the states are members of the Vienna Convention this law will always apply and even if it is not stated in the contract the private international law of that country will lead to the application of the Vienna Convention.3 If the Vienna Convention is ratified by a country it becomes part of the law of that country and applies automatically to contracts falling within its scope. ...read more.

Middle

38 (1) CISG) and furthermore he must exactly indicate what is not in accordance with the contract so that the seller can get an idea of what is wrong. Otherwise he will lose his right of express warranty (Art. 39 CISG). If the buyer claimed in time the following solutions are posed by the Vienna Convention: The first possibility is the removal of defects through subsequent improvement (Art. 46 (3) CISG). This includes besides the repair or the substitution of missing parts also the delivery of spare parts. But subsequent improvement can not be demanded if it is practically impossible, which occurs if for example the repair is technically not possible, or if it is not reasonable. This is the case when the seller is not the actual manufacturer of the product but only an intermediary.8 Instead of subsequent improvement the buyer has the right to demand compensation delivery according to Art. 46 (2) CISG. This means that the damaged goods will be send back to the seller and the seller sends the goods conform to the contract in substitution.9 But this right is only granted if the goods are basically unchanged (Art. 82 (1) CISG). To protect the seller, compensation delivery is only granted if there is a substantial breach of contract which means that the result is of such detriment to the buyer from what he has expected (Art. ...read more.

Conclusion

Luxembourg Mauritania Mexico Moldavia Mongolia The Netherlands . Convention apply to The Netherlands with Aruba New Zealand Norway Article 92 regarding Part II. Article 94, when one party has her place of business in Denmark, Finland, Norway and Sweden and the other party has her place of business in another of the mentioned States or Iceland. Peru Poland Romania The Russian Federation Articles 12 and 96, when a party has her place of business in Russian Federation. Singapore Article 95 regarding Article 1(1)(b). Slovakia Article 95 regarding Article 1(1)(b). Slovenia Spain Sweden Article 92 regarding Part II. Article 94, when one party has her place of business in Denmark, Finland, Norway and Sweden and the other party has her place of business in another of the mentioned States or Iceland. Switzerland Syrian Arab Republic Uganda Ukraine Articles 12 and 96, when a party has her place of business in Estonia. United States of America Article 95 regarding Article 1(1)(b). Uruguay Uzbekistan Venezuela Zambia 1 e.g. UK and Japan did not bring the Vienna Convention into force 2 Kilian, 2001, 10 Journal of Transnational Law & Policy p. 217 3 Bridge;1999; p.44,45 4 Caemmerer/Schlechtriem, 1994, Art. 1 CISG, p. 28 5 Date : 30.08.2000, Number : 9 U 13/00, Oberlandesgericht Frankfurt, available on: http://www.unilex.info/case.cfm?pid=1&do=case&id=511&step=FullText [Access on 17.11.2004] 6 Karollus, 1993, p. 378-379 7 Lehr, 1998, p. 155 8 ibid., p. 150 9 Piltz, 1993, p.56 10 Lehr, 1998, p.151 5 ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our University Degree International Law section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related University Degree International Law essays

  1. How does the Climate Change Convention differ from the Vienna Convention? What were the ...

    It involved that human activities have increased the atmospheric concentrations of greenhouse gases and the increases improve the natural greenhouse effects in which may result on average of the temperature increasing of the Earth's surface and atmosphere and that may adversely affect the ecosystems and humankind.

  2. Montevideo convention and criteria of statehood

    system, to conduct international relations with other states, as well as the political technical and financial capabilities to do so".16 Montevideo scrutinized: shortcomings v propositions Notwithstanding prevalent allusion to the Convention by legal academia trying to pin down a definition, the Montevideo definition is conceded as deficient by some of the most highly qualified scholars.

  1. The relationship between national and international law

    then it is not binding. Treaties are not made by Congress, but only by the President with ratification by the Senate. Nevertheless, those treaties become the law of the land, regardless of what the House of Representatives or the Supreme Court might have said about it.

  2. International law does not offer any effective remedy where the government of a State ...

    Global Policy Forum, <http://www.globalpolicy.org/component/content/article/150/32601.html > at 1 June 2009. 2 The five permanent member states (USA, Russia, China, UK, France) of the UN Security Council have veto power. 3 International Freedom for Expression, Fears for arrested Journalists safety if extradited to Tajikistan (2001)

  1. Between the various sources of International Law there exists an obvious hierarchy, in which ...

    Part of the court's judgement was that states have "obligations...towards the international community as a whole" and that such obligations "derive, for example...from the outlawing of acts of aggression, and of genocide"49 among others. Another example of erga omnes obligations is to be found in the ICJ's ruling of 1996

  2. Public International Law

    life of the society so that the market does apt operate in a way injurious to public welfare. Another contribution of the progressive legacy is that it focused on the self-realization of the lawyers; their commitment and obligation to the society.3 The third root directly antecedent of public interest law is the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU)

  1. Is there a future for the principle of self-determination in international law in the ...

    in relation to the way in which the right to self-determination has been invoked as a remedy in secessionist struggles is all to apparent in relation to the conflict in Yugoslavia. In opinion No 1 of the European Community's Arbitration Commission36 it was held "that the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia is in the process of dissolution."

  2. THE USE OF FORCE IN THE INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY

    On the other side there are still many arguments by jurists that the creation of the UNCH was a 'new beginning', which saw the construction of new customary rules that did not go further than the scope of self defence found in Article 51.

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work