"A Study on the Scope of Loss under United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods - Focusing on whether to include the lawyer’s fees or not -"

2021 ◽  
Vol 103 ◽  
pp. 177-216
Author(s):  
Chang-Sop Shin ◽  
Ki-Yun Nam
2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Małgorzata Danuta Pohl-Michałek

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 Although there are some CISG Contracting States that initially applied the reservation but have since withdrawn it, there are still a few Contracting States where the reservation remains[1], including the two largest trading countries – China and the United States.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).


2018 ◽  
Vol 17 (3) ◽  
pp. 156-168
Author(s):  
Ndubuisi Nwafor ◽  
Collins Ajibo ◽  
Chidi Lloyd

Purpose The aims and objectives of the United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods (CISG) have been defeated by the intrusion of domestic laws of different contracting states in the interpretation of the provisions of this Convention. One of the most abused channels of this un-uniform interpretation is through art 4 of the CISG, which excludes the matters of validity and property from the Convention’s jurisdiction. This paper, therefore, aims to critically analyze the dangers of unsystematic reliance on the domestic laws in the interpretation of art 4 of the CISG on matters involving transnational validity and property. Design/methodology/approach The paper will use doctrinal methodology with critical and analytical approaches. The paper will incisively study the doctrines, theories and principles of law associated with validity of commercial contracts and the implications of exclusion of the doctrine of “validity” under the CISG. Findings The findings and contribution to knowledge will be by way of canvassing for a uniform transnational validity doctrine that will streamline and position the CISG to serve as a uniform international commercial convention. Originality/value This paper adopted a conceptual approach. Even though the paper ventilated the views of many writers on the issue of application of the doctrine of validity under the CISG, the paper, however, carved its own niche by making original recommendations on how to create a uniform validity jurisprudence under the CISG.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document