Różne perspektywy dotyczące skutków art. 95 CISG

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Małgorzata Danuta Pohl-Michałek
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
United Nations ◽  
International Law ◽  
United States Of America ◽  
Democratic Republic ◽  
The United States ◽  
Private International Law ◽  
United Nations Convention ◽  
International Sale Of Goods ◽  
Conflict Of Law

The 1980 United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods (CISG) was adopted in order to provide uniform rules governing the international sale of goods. It has already been ratified by an impressive number of 92 Contracting States, with the major trading countries taking the lead. The CISG applies to contracts for the sale of goods between parties whose places of business are in different States, where the States are CISG Contracting States (Article 1(1)(a)). Moreover, it applies to contracts for the sale of goods when the contracting parties have their places of business in different States and when the rules of private international law lead to the application of the law of a CISG Contracting State (Article 1(1)(b)). However, at the time of ratification, the prospective Contracting States are given the possibility of making additional reservations, including one set out in Article 95 CISG, which limits the application of Article 1(1)(b) of the Convention. Although there are some CISG Contracting States that initially applied the reservation but have since withdrawn it, there are still a few Contracting States where the reservation remains[1], including the two largest trading countries – China and the United States. The paper presents various approaches regarding the interpretation of the effects of the reservation set out in Article 95 CISG, which in fact challenge the principle of the uniform interpretation and application of the Convention’s provisions. The author argues that the Article 95 CISG reservation leads to increased confusion and problematic conflict of law issues that bring more chaos than benefits.   [1] The remaining Article 95 CISG Reservatory States are: Armenia, China, the Lao People's Democratic Republic, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Singapore, Slovakia and the United States of America. Information is based on the official website: https://treaties.un.org/pages/ViewDetails.aspx?src=TREATY&mtdsg_no=X-10&chapter=10 (accessed: 9.12.2019).

scholarly journals The United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods: Guide to Research and Literature

1996 ◽  
Vol 24 (1) ◽  
pp. 48-70
Author(s):  
Claire M. Germain
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
United Nations ◽  
The United States ◽  
Fundamental Principle ◽  
Freedom Of Contract ◽  
Opt Out ◽  
United Nations Convention ◽  
The United Nations ◽  
International Sale Of Goods

On January 1, 1988, the United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods (the Convention) became effective in the United States. In general, the Convention (also referred to as the “Vienna Sales Convention,” the “Sales Convention,” the “CISG,” or the “UN Convention”) applies to contracts for the sale of goods between enterprises having their places of business in different countries, provided these countries have adopted the Convention. Freedom of contract, however, is a fundamental principle of the Convention, and the parties may opt out or modify the effects of its provisions.

A flight to Rome: Ernst Rabel's intellectual itinerary

2011 ◽  
Vol 79 (3-4) ◽  
pp. 533-552
Author(s):  
Jakob Fortunat Stagl
Keyword(s):  
Roman Empire ◽  
United Nations ◽  
International Law ◽  
Private International Law ◽  
United Nations Convention ◽  
The Law ◽  
International Sale Of Goods

AbstractHow can one explain that Ernst Rabel (1874–1951), born in Vienna, with Jewish roots, became the architect of the United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods (CISG) and one of the foremost authorities ever on Private International Law? Was this a mere coincidence or was his method of looking for similarities in the law of di erent nations rather than looking for its disparities the product of an universalism rooted in the example of the Roman Empire and its law and the experience of the multiethnic Empire of the Hapsburgs?

scholarly journals Field of Application of United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods

2015 ◽  
Author(s):  
Adnan Deynekli
Keyword(s):  
International Trade ◽  
United Nations ◽  
International Law ◽  
Third Party ◽  
Private International Law ◽  
United Nations Convention ◽  
The Law ◽  
International Sale Of Goods

United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods (CISG) entered into force on the 1st August 2011 in Turkey. CISG is accepted with the purpose of development and encouragement of international trade and application of uniform rules for resolution of disputes arising from the contracts for the international sale of goods. CISG applies to contracts of sale of goods between parties whose places of business are in different states when the states are contracting states; or when the rules of private international law lead to the application of the law of a contracting state. Neither the nationality of the parties nor the civil or commercial character of the parties or of the contract is to be taken into consideration in determining the application of CISG. In order to apply CISG, there has to be a contract about international sale of goods and the parties shall be from different contracting states or the rules of private international law shall lead to the application of the law of a contracting state. The parties may totally or partially exclude the application of this CISG. CISG does not apply in terms of third party rights and the validity of the contract or of any of its provisions or of any usage.

scholarly journals 9/11 as False Flag: Why International Law Must Dare to Care

2017 ◽  
Vol 25 (3) ◽  
pp. 371-392 ◽  
Author(s):  
Amy Baker Benjamin
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Twentieth Century ◽  
United Nations ◽  
International Law ◽  
The United States ◽  
September 11 ◽  
African History ◽  
The Us ◽  
The United Nations ◽  
International War

At the heart of contemporary international law lies a paradox: the attacks on the United States of September 11, 2001 have justified 16 years of international war, yet the official international community, embodied principally in the United Nations, has failed to question or even scrutinise the US government's account of those attacks. Despite the emergence of an impressive and serious body of literature that impugns the official account and even suggests that 9/11 may have been a classic (if unprecedentedly monstrous) false-flag attack, international statesmen, following the lead of scholars, have been reluctant to wade into what appears to be a very real controversy. African nations are no strangers to the concept of the false flag tactic, and to its use historically in the pursuit of illegitimate geopolitical aims and interests. This article draws on recent African history in this regard, as well as on deeper twentieth-century European and American history, to lay a foundation for entertaining the possibility of 9/11-as-false-flag. This article then argues that the United Nations should seek to fulfil its core and incontrovertible ‘jury’ function of determining the existence of inter-state aggression in order to exercise a long-overdue oversight of the official 9/11 narrative.

scholarly journals Legal substantiation of retaliatory measures of the Russian Federation to economic sanctions of the United States, European Union, and their allies

2020 ◽  
pp. 24-37
Author(s):  
Larisa Yur'evna Dobrynina ◽  
Anna Viktorovna Gubareva
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
European Union ◽  
International Law ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Economic Activity ◽  
Economic Sanctions ◽  
The United States ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Private International Law ◽  
The Russian Federation

The authors examine the economic sanctions introduced nu the U.S., EU and their allies against the Russian Federation, as well as the legal mechanism of retaliatory measures taken by Russia on the nationwide scale. The changes in the international legal regulation derailed the vector of global development, which was bringing real freedom of economic activity. Establishment of the sanction regime by the aforementioned parties signifies a struggle for own influence, weakening of the positive trade and economic ties, as well as an attempt to institute a regime of protectionism within the international trade turnover exclusively for their own benefit. Based on the analysis of the normative-legal documents, an assessment is made on the legal legitimacy of the introduced discriminatory measures of the allies from the perspective of the norms of international law. This article presents the analysis of the positions of federal laws and other legislative bills of the Russian Federation, establishing gradual constraining countermeasures for foreign subjects in various spheres of activity. The authors substantiate the fact that introduction of retaliatory economic sanctions by the Russian Federation with regards to the United States, European Union, and their allies is directly related to the implementation of the principle of reciprocity, currently existing within private international law. It is noted that all these actions on protection from illegitimate sanctions are realized by Russia practically without participation of UN, WTO and other reputable international organizations in regulation of the “sanctions” issue. The extraterritorial measures introduced by the United States and the European Union justifies the movement of Russian into a new stage of evolution of legal regulation of the foreign economic activity, and in foreign trade – establishment of new markets in Asia, Africa and Latin America.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document