scholarly journals The United States Parol Evidence Rule under the United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods

1997 ◽  
pp. 70-119
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
United Nations ◽  
The United States ◽  
United Nations Convention ◽  
The United Nations ◽  
International Sale Of Goods

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.

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 U.N. Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards and Issue Preclusion: A Traditional Collateral Estoppel Determination

2004 ◽  
Vol 65 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Sabrina M. Sudol
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
United Nations ◽  
The United States ◽  
Commercial Arbitration ◽  
International Commercial Arbitration ◽  
Recognition And Enforcement ◽  
United Nations Convention ◽  
Per Se ◽  
The United Nations ◽  
Commercial Disputes

Although the United Nations Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards provides for the “recognition” and “enforcement” of non-domestic arbitral awards in commercial disputes,1 this article will show that in order for an issue resolved through arbitration to be granted preclusive effect in subsequent litigation in the United States, the proponent must also satisfy the traditional requirements of collateral estoppel. In this way, the Convention’s reach is not quite as expansive as a party might expect, for the ensuing judicial analysis often involves complex questions of law and fact while maintaining respect for the favored status of international commercial arbitration. The result is far from per se preclusivity.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document