DREPTUL COMERTULUI INTERNATIONAL

sâmbătă, 12 aprilie 2008

Art.1 din ICSG cu comentarii (eng)

The UNCITRAL Digest of case law on the United
Nations Convention on the International Sale of Goods [*]

A/CN.9/SER.C/DIGEST/CISG/1 [8 June 2004]
Reproduced only in direct link with the teaching activities for students

[Text of Article 1
Digest of Article 1 case law
- Convention prevails over recourse to private international law
- Contracts governed by the Convention
- Goods
- Internationality and place of business
- Autonomous applicability
- Indirect applicability]

ARTICLE 1
(1) This Convention applies to contracts of sale of goods between parties whose places of business are in different States:

(a) when the States are Contracting States; or
(b) when the rules of private international law lead
to the application of the law of a Contracting State.

(2) The fact that the parties have their places of business in different States is to be disregarded whenever this fact does not appear either from the contract or from any dealings between, or from information disclosed by, the parties at any time before or at the conclusion of the contract.

(3) 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 this Convention.

DIGEST OF ARTICLE 1 CASE LAW

1. This article provides some of the rules for determining whether the Convention applies. Article 1 has to be read in connection with articles 2 and 3, which respectively narrow down and extend the substantive sphere of application of the Convention.

Convention prevails over recourse to private international law

2. The first issue to be decided before examining the Convention's substantive, international and territorial sphere of application is that of its relationship to the private international law rules of the forum. This is necessary, as both the Convention and the private international law rules deal with international contracts. According to case law, before resorting to the private international law rules of the forum, courts of Contracting States have to look into whether the Convention applies; [1] in other words, recourse to the Convention prevails over recourse to the forum's private international law;[2] since as a substantive law convention [3] the CISG's rules are more specific and lead directly to a substantive solution whereas the private international law approach requires a two step approach (identification of the applicable law and application thereof).[4]

Contracts governed by the Convention

3. The Convention applies to contracts for the sale of goods. Although the Convention does not provide any definition of this type of contract,[5] a definition can be derived from articles 30 and 53.[6] Thus, the contract for the sale of goods covered by the Convention can be defined as a contract "pursuant to which one party (the seller) is bound to deliver the goods and transfer the property in the goods sold and the other party (the buyer) is obliged to pay the price and accept the goods."[7] Thus, as one court put it, the essence of the contract lies in goods being exchanged for money.[8]

4. The Convention also covers other types of contracts, such as contracts for the delivery of goods by installments,[9] as can be derived from article 73 of the Convention, and contracts providing for the delivery of the goods sold directly from the supplier to the seller's customer.[10] Pursuant to article 29, contracts modifying a sales contract also fall within the substantive sphere of application of the Convention.[11]

5. Article 3 contains a special rule which extends — within certain limits — the Convention's substantive sphere of application to contracts for the sale of goods to be manufactured or produced as well as to contracts pursuant to which the seller is also bound to deliver labour or services.

6. Most courts considering the issue have concluded that the Convention does not apply to distribution agreements,[12] as these agreements aim more at the "organization of the distribution" than at the transfer of the ownership.[13] The various contracts for the sale of goods concluded in execution of the distribution agreement, can, however, be governed by the Convention,[14] even where the distribution agreement was concluded before the entry into force of the Convention.[15]

7. Franchise agreements as well fall outside the Convention's sphere of application.[16]

Goods

8.The Convention does not define "goods". Nevertheless, pursuant to Article 7(1), the concept of "goods" should be interpreted autonomously,[17] in light of the Convention's "international character" and "the need to promote uniformity in its application", rather than by referring to domestic law for a definition.

9. According to case law, "goods" in the sense of the Convention are goods that are, at the moment of delivery,[18] "moveable and tangible",[19] regardless of whether they are solid or not,[20] regardless of whether they are used or new goods,[21] and regardless of whether they are alive or not.[22] Given these decisions, it is arguably consistent that intangible goods, such as intellectual property rights, an interest in a limited liability company,[23] or the assignment of debt [24] are considered not to fall within the Convention's concept of "goods". The same is true for a market research study.[25] However, according to one court, the Convention appears to also apply to goods that are not tangible, since the court states that the concept of "goods" is to be interpreted "extensively".[26]

10. Whereas the sale of computer hardware clearly falls within the sphere of application of the Convention,[27] the same cannot be said about software. Some courts consider only standard software to be "goods" under the Convention,[28] however another court concluded that any kind of software is considered a "good", even custom-made software.[29]

Internationality and place of business

11. The Convention's sphere of application is limited to contracts for the international sale of goods. According to article 1(1), a contract for the sale of goods is international when the parties have — at the moment of the conclusion of the contract [30] — their relevant place of business in different States.[31]

12. Although the concept of "place of business" is paramount to the determination of internationality, the Convention does not define it. It deals solely with the problem of which of the various places of business of a given person is to be taken into account to determine internationality (article 10).

13. According to one court, "place of business" can be defined as "the place from which a business activity is de facto carried out [...]; this requires a certain duration and stability as well as a certain amount of autonomy".[32] Another court has concluded that a liaison-office cannot be considered a "placeof business" under the Convention.[33]

14. The internationality requirement is not met where the parties have their relevant place of business in the same country. This is true even where they have different nationalities, as article 1(3) states that "the nationality of the parties [...] is [not] to be taken into consideration in determining the application of this Convention".[34] Also, the fact that the place of the conclusion of the contract is located in a different State from the State in which the performance takes place does not render the contract "international".[35] For the purposes of the Convention's applicability, the parties' civil or commercial character is also irrelevant.[36]

15. Where the contract for the sale of goods is concluded through an intermediary, it is necessary to establish who is party to the contract in order to be able to determine whether the contract is international. As the issue of who is party to a contract is not dealt with in the CISG,[37] recourse is to be had to the law applicable by virtue of the rules of private international law of the forum in order to determine who is party to the contract. It is that party's place of business which has to be taken into account to decide whether the contract is international.[38]

16. According to article 1(2), internationality is irrelevant where "the fact that the parties have their places of business in different States [...] does not appear either from the contract or from any dealings between, or from information disclosed by, the parties at any time before or at the conclusion of the contract".[39] Thus, the Convention protects the parties' reliance upon the domestic setting of the transaction. The party that asserts that the Convention is not applicable due to the internationality of the contract not being apparent has to prove its assertion.[40]

Autonomous applicability

17. The internationality of the contract for the sale of goods by itself is not sufficient to make the Convention applicable.[41] Article 1(1) lists two alternative criteria of applicability, one of which has to be met in order for the Convention to apply. According to the criterion set forth in article 1(1)(a), the Convention is "directly"[42] or "autonomously" [43] applicable, i.e. without the need to resort to the rules of private international law,[44] when the States in which the parties have their relevant place of business are Contracting States. As the list of Contracting States is growing, this criterion is leading more and more often to the applicability of the Convention.[45]

18. In order for the Convention to be applicable by virtue of article 1(1)(a), the parties must have their relevant place of business in a Contracting State. "If the two States in which the parties have their places of business are Contracting States, the Convention applies even if the rules of private international law of the forum would normally designate the law of a third country",[46] provided that the application of that country's law is not due to a parties' choice that is intended to exclude the Convention.[47]

19. When a State becomes a Contracting State is determined by article 99. For the Convention to apply by virtue of article 1(1)(a), one must also take into account whether the States in which the parties have their relevant place of business have declared either an article 92 or an article 93 reservation. Where one State has made an article 92 reservation, the Convention as a whole cannot be applicable by virtue of article 1(1)(a). Rather, one must determine on the basis of 1(1)(b) whether the Part to which the reservation relates is applicable.[48] The same is true mutatis mutandis in respect of a party that has its relevant place of business in a territory in relation to which the Contracting State to which the territory belongs has made an article 93 reservation.

Indirect applicability

20. In Contracting States, the Convention can also be applicable – by virtue of article 1(1)(b) – where only one (or neither) party has its relevant place of business in Contracting States,[49] as long as the rules of private international law lead to the law of a Contracting State.[50] Since the relevant rules of private international law are those of the forum,[51] it will depend on the domestic rules of private international law whether the parties are allowed to choose the applicable law, whether one has to look into the rules of private international of the law designated by the rules of private international of the forum, etc.

21. Where the private international law rules of the forum are based upon the 1980 Rome Convention on the Law Applicable to Contractual Obligations,[52] the parties' choice of the law of a Contracting State can lead to the applicability of the Convention by virtue of article 1(1)(b),[53] since article 3 of the Rome Convention recognizes party autonomy.[54] This is also true where the rules of private international law of the forum are those laid down in the 1955 Hague Convention on the Law Applicable to International Sales,[55] as article 2 [56] of this convention also obliges judges to acknowledge the choice of law made by the parties.[57]

22. The Convention may be selected by the parties as the law applicable to the their contract.[58] Where the parties did not make a choice of law or where the choice is not valid, one has to resort to the objective criteria set forth by the rules of private international law of the forum to determine whether the Convention can be applicable by virtue of article 1(1)(b). Thus, under article 4(1) of the 1980 Rome Convention, one has to apply the law "most closely connected" to the contract;[59] according to article 4(2), it is presumed that the contract is most closely connected with the country where the party who is to effect the performance which is characteristic of the contract has its habitual residence at the time of conclusion of the contract. For this reason, the Convention was often applied by courts in contracting States to the Rome Convention when the seller, i.e. the party that has to effect the characteristic performance,[60] had its place of business in a Contracting State to the Convention.[61] Under the 1955 Hague Convention, absent choice of law, one has to apply the law of the seller,[62] except in cases where the seller receives the order in the buyer's country, in which case the law of the buyer governs.[63]

23. At the 1980 Diplomatic Conference, a delegate raised the issue that countries which had enacted special legislation regarding international transactions should be allowed not to apply article 1(1)(b), so as to avoid "the effect which article 1(1)(b) would have on the application of their special legislation on international trade."[64] As a consequence, article 95 was introduced, which gives Contracting States the possibility to choose not to be bound by article 1(1)(b).[65] Thus, judges located in Contracting States that declared an article 95 reservation will not apply the Convention by virtue of article 1(1)(b); this does not, however, affect the Convention's applicability in those Contracting States by virtue of article 1(1)(a).[66]

24. Although the Convention does not bind non-Contracting-States, it has been applied in courts of non-Contracting States where the rules of private international law led to the law of a Contracting State.[67]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

FOOTNOTES

* The present text was prepared using the full text of the decisions cited in the Case Law on UNCITRAL Texts (CLOUT) abstracts and other citations listed in the footnotes. The abstracts are intended to serve only as summaries of the underlying decisions and may not reflect all the points made in the digest. Readers are advised to consult the full texts of the listed court and arbitral decisions rather than relying solely on the CLOUT abstracts.

[Citations to cisgw3 case presentations have been substituted [in brackets] for the case citations provided in the UNCITRAL Digest. This substitution has been made to facilitate online access to CLOUT abstracts, original texts of court and arbitral decisions, and full text English translations of these texts (available in most but not all cases). For citations UNCITRAL had used, go to .]

1. CLOUT case No. 378 [ITALY Tribunale [District Court] Vigevano 12 July 2000, available online at ] (see full text of the decision).

2. For this interpretation, see CLOUT case No. 380 [ITALY Tribunale [District Court] Pavia 29 December 1999, available online at ]; [GERMANY Landgericht [District Court] Zwickau 19 March 1999, available online at ]; CLOUT case No. 251 [SWITZERLAND Handelsgericht [Commercial Court] Zürich 30 November 1998, available online at ]; CLOUT case No. 345 [GERMANY Landgericht [District Court] Heilbronn 15 September 1997; available at ]; CLOUT case No. 84 [GERMANY Oberlandesgericht [Appellate Court] Frankfurt 20 April 1994, available online at ] (see full text of the decision).

3. [AUSTRIA Oberster Gerichtshof [Supreme Court] 9 March 2000, available online at ]; [SWITZERLAND Cantone del Ticino [Appellate Court] Lugano 8 June 1999, available online at ].

4. For this approach, see CLOUT case No. 378 [ITALY Tribunale [District Court] Vigevano 12 July 2000, available online at ] (see full text of the decision); [ITALY Tribunale [District Court] Rimini 26 November 2002, available online at ].

5. This has been pointed out for instance by CLOUT case No. 106 [AUSTRIA Oberster Gerichtshof [Supreme Court] 10 November 1994, available online at ] (see full text of the decision).

6. See Rechtbank Rotterdam, Netherlands, 1 November 2001, Nederlands Internationaal Privaatrecht, 2002, No. 114; [SWITZERLAND Tribunal Cantonal Vaud [Appellate Court] case No. 01 93 1061 of 11 March 1996, available online at ]; [ITALY Tribunale [District Court] Rimini 26 November 2002, available online at ].

7. See CLOUT case No. 106 [AUSTRIA Oberster Gerichtshof [Supreme Court] 10 November 1994, available online at ] (see full text of the decision); for a reference to the buyer's obligation mentioned in the definition referred to in the text, see also [BELGIUM Rechtbank [District Court] Hasselt 2 May 1995, available online at ].

8. CLOUT case No. 328 [SWITZERLAND Kantonsgericht [District Court] Zug 21 October 1999, available online at ] (see full text of the decision).

9. See [GERMANY Hamburg Arbitration Award of 29 December 1998, available online at ]; CLOUT case No. 251 [SWITZERLAND Handelsgericht [Commercial Court] Zürich 30 November 1998, available online at ]; CLOUT case No. 238 [AUSTRIA Oberster Gerichtshof [Supreme Court] 12 February 1998, available online at ]; CLOUT case No. 166 [GERMANY Hamburg Arbitration award of 21 March / 21 June 1996; available at / ]; CLOUT case No. 154 [FRANCE Cour d'appel [Appellate Court] Grenoble 22 February 1995, available online at ].

10. See CLOUT case No. 269 [GERMANY Bundesgerichtshof [Supreme Court] 12 February 1998, available online at ] (see full text of the decision); CLOUT case No. 261 [SWITZERLAND Bezirksgericht [District Court] Sanne 20 February 1997; available at ].

11. See CLOUT case No. 297 [GERMANY Oberlandesgericht [Appellate Court] München 21 January 1998, available online at ]; CLOUT case No. 133 [GERMANY Oberlandesgericht [Appellate Court] München 8 February 1995, available online at ]; [ICC Court of Arbitration, case No. 7331 of 1994, available online at ]; CLOUT case No. 5 [GERMANY Landgericht [Appellate Court] Hamburg 26 September 1990, available online at ].

12. See CLOUT case No. 297 [GERMANY Oberlandesgericht [Appellate Court] München 21 January 1998, available online at ] (see full text of the decision); CLOUT case No. 295 [GERMANY Oberlandesgericht [Appellate Court] Hamm 5 November 1997, available online at ]; CLOUT case No. 273 [GERMANY Oberlandesgericht [Appellate Court] München 9 July 1997; available at ] (see full text of the decision); CLOUT case No. 169 [GERMANY Oberlandesgericht [Appellate Court] Düsseldorf 11 July 1996, available online at ]; CLOUT case No. 126 [HUNGARY Fovárosi Biróság [Metropolitan Court] Budapest 19 March 1996, available online at ]; CLOUT case No. 281 [GERMANY Oberlandesgericht [Appellate Court] Koblenz 17 September 1993, available online at ] (see full text of the decision); [NETHERLANDS Gerechtshof [Appellate Court] Amsterdam 16 July 1992, available online at ]; CLOUT case No. 420 [UNITED STATES Viva Vino Import v. Farnese Vini Federal District Court [Pennsylvania] 29 August 2000, available online at ]; [NETHERLANDS Gerechtshof [Appellate Court] Arnhem 27 April 1999, available online at ]; [NETHERLANDS Rechtsbank [District Court] 's-Gravenhage 2 July 1997, available online at ]. One court has applied the CISG to a distributorship agreement. See CLOUT case No. 379 [ITALY Corte di Cassazione [Supreme Court] 14 December 1999, available online at ]. For a case in which the issue was raised but not resolved, see CLOUT case No. 187 [UNITED STATES Helen Kaminski v. Marketing Australian Products Federal District Court [New York] 21 July 1997, available online at ].

13. CLOUT case No. 192 [SWITZERLAND Obergericht [Appellate Court] Luzern 8 January 1997, available online at ] (see full text of the decision).

14. See CLOUT case No. 295 [GERMANY Oberlandesgericht [Appellate Court] Hamm 5 November 1997, available online at ]; CLOUT case No. 273 [GERMANY Oberlandesgericht [Appellate Court] München 9 July 1997; available at ] (see full text of the decision); CLOUT case No. 169 [GERMANY Oberlandesgericht [Appellate Court] Düsseldorf 11 July 1996, available online at ]; CLOUT case No. 204 [FRANCE Cour d'appel [Appellate Court] Grenoble 15 May 1996, available online at ]; CLOUT case No. 281 [GERMANY Oberlandesgericht [Appellate Court] Koblenz 17 September 1993, available online at ] (see full text of the decision); [ICC Court of Arbitration, case No. 8908 of September 1998, available online at ]; [ICC Court of Arbitration, case No. 8611 of 23 January 1997, available online at ].

15. CLOUT case No. 281 [GERMANY Oberlandesgericht [Appellate Court] Koblenz 17 September 1993, available online at ] (see full text of the decision).

16. See CLOUT case No. 192 [SWITZERLAND Obergericht [Appellate Court] Luzern 8 January 1997, available online at ].

17. See text under article 7.

18. See CLOUT case No. 152 [FRANCE Cour d'appel [Appellate Court] Grenoble 26 April 1995, available online at ] (see full text of the decision); [ITALY Tribunale [District Court] Rimini 26 November 2002, available online at ].

19. See CLOUT case No. 328 [SWITZERLAND Kantonsgericht [District Court] Zug 21 October 1999, available online at ] (see full text of the decision); CLOUT case No. 380 [ITALY Tribunale [District Court] Pavia 29 December 1999, available online at ] (see full text of the decision); CLOUT case No. 168 [GERMANY Oberlandesgericht [Appellate Court] Köln 21 May 1996, available online at ] (see full text of the decision); CLOUT case No. 122 [GERMANY Oberlandesgericht [Appellate Court] Köln 26 August 1994, available online at ]; CLOUT case No. 106 [AUSTRIA Oberster Gerichtshof [Supreme Court] 10 November 1994, available online at ] (see full text of the decision); [ITALY Tribunale [District Court] Rimini 26 November 2002, available online at ].

20. See CLOUT case No. 176 [AUSTRIA Oberster Gerichtshof [Supreme Court] 6 February 1996, available online at ], applying the Convention to the international sale of propane gas.

21. See CLOUT case No. 168 [GERMANY Oberlandesgericht [Appellate Court] Köln 21 May 1996, available online at ] (used car); [GERMANY Landgericht [District Court] Köln 16 November 1995, available online at ].

22. See CLOUT case No. 100 [NETHERLANDS Rechtbank [District Court] Arnhem 30 December 1993, available online at ] (live lambs); CLOUT case No. 280 [GERMANY Oberlandesgericht [Appellate Court] Jena 26 May 1998, available online at ] (live fish); CLOUT case No. 312 [FRANCE Cour d'appel [Appellate Court] Paris 14 January 1998, available online at ] (circus elephants). Compare CLOUT case No. 106 [AUSTRIA Oberster Gerichtshof [Supreme Court] 10 November 1994, available online at ] (chinchilla pelts); CLOUT case No. 227 [GERMANY Oberlandesgericht [Appellate Court] Hamm 22 September 1992, available online at ] (bacon). For a decision that considers animals as "goods" in the sense of the Convention, see [GERMANY Landgericht [District Court] Flensburg 19 January 2001, available online at ].

23. See CLOUT case No. 161 [HUNGARY Budapest Arbitration Award case No. Vb 92205 of 20 December 1993, available online at ].

24. See CLOUT case No. 378 [ITALY Tribunale [District Court] Vigevano 12 July 2000, available online at ] (see full text of the decision).

25. See CLOUT case No. 122 [GERMANY Oberlandesgericht [Appellate Court] Köln 26 August 1994, available online at ].

26. CLOUT case No. 281 [GERMANY Oberlandesgericht [Appellate Court] Koblenz 17 September 1993, available online at ] (see full text of the decision).

27. See [GERMANY Landgericht [District Court] München 29 May 1995, available online at ].

28. See CLOUT case No. 122 [GERMANY Oberlandesgericht [Appellate Court] Köln 26 August 1994, available online at ] (see full text of the decision); CLOUT case No. 131 [GERMANY Landgericht [Appellate Court] München 8 February 1995, available online at ].

29. See CLOUT case No. 281 [GERMANY Oberlandesgericht [Appellate Court] Koblenz 17 September 1993, available online at ] (see full text of the decision).

30. See [GERMANY Oberlandesgericht [Appellate Court] Dresden 27 December 1999, available online at ].

31. See CLOUT case No. 378 [ITALY Tribunale [District Court] Vigevano 12 July 2000, available online at ] (see full text of the decision); CLOUT case No. 168 [GERMANY Oberlandesgericht [Appellate Court] Köln 21 May 1996, available online at ] (see full text of the decision); CLOUT case No. 106 [AUSTRIA Oberster Gerichtshof [Supreme Court] 10 November 1994, available online at ]; [ITALY Tribunale [District Court] Rimini 26 November 2002, available online at ].

32. [GERMANY Oberlandesgericht [Appellate Court] Stuttgart 28 February 2000, available online at ]; [ITALY Tribunale [District Court] Rimini 26 November 2002, available online at ]; for a similar definition see CLOUT case No. 106 [AUSTRIA Oberster Gerichtshof [Supreme Court] 10 November 1994, available online at ] (see full text of the decision); for a court decision stating that the Convention's definition of "place of business" requires the parties to "really" do business out of that place, see [GERMANY Amtsgericht [Lower Court] Duisburg 13 April 2000, available online at ].

33. See CLOUT case No. 158 [FRANCE Cour d'appel [Appellate Court] Paris 22 April 1992, available online at ].

34. For references to the irrelevance of the parties' nationality, see [GERMANY Bundesgerichtshof [Supreme Court] 31 October 2001, available online at ]; [BELGIUM Rechtbank [District Court] Veurne 25 April 2001, available online at ]; [BULGARIA Arbitration case No. 56/1995 Bulgarian Chamber of Commerce and Industry 24 April 1996, available online at ].

35. See [GERMANY Oberlandesgericht [Appellate Court] Köln 27 November 1991, available online at ].

36. [GERMANY Bundesgerichtshof [Supreme Court] 31 October 2001, available online at ].

37. For court decisions stating that issues of agency law and related matters are not dealt with by the Convention, see CLOUT case No. 378 [ITALY Tribunale [District Court] Vigevano 12 July 2000, available online at ] (see full text of the decision); CLOUT case No. 189 [AUSTRIA Oberster Gerichtshof [Supreme Court] 20 March 1997, available online at ] (see full text of the decision); [SWITZERLAND Tribunale [Appellate Court] Lugano 12 February 1996, available online at ]; CLOUT case No. 334 [SWITZERLAND Obergericht [Appellate Court] Thurgau 19 December 1995, available online at ]; [GERMANY Landgericht [District Court] Kassel 22 June 1995, available online at ]; [GERMANY Amtsgericht [Lower Court] Alsfeld 12 May 1995, available online at ]; CLOUT case No. 80 [GERMANY Kammergericht [Appellate Court] Berlin 24 January 1994, available online at ] (see full text of the decision); CLOUT case No. 95 [SWITZERLAND Zivilgericht [Civil Court] Basel-Stadt 21 December 1992, available online at ] (see full text of the decision); CLOUT case No. 5 [GERMANY Landgericht [Appellate Court] Hamburg 26 September 1990, available online at ].

38. See [GERMANY Oberlandesgericht [Appellate Court] Köln, 13 November 2000, available online at ].

39. For a reference to this provision in case law, see [AUSTRIA Oberster Gerichtshof [Supreme Court] 21 March 2000, available online at ]; CLOUT case No. 378 [ITALY Tribunale [District Court] Vigevano 12 July 2000, available online at ] (see full text of the decision).

40. See CLOUT case No. 378 [ITALY Tribunale [District Court] Vigevano 12 July 2000, available online at ] (see full text of the decision).

41. See CLOUT case No. 378 [ITALY Tribunale [District Court] Vigevano 12 July 2000, available online at ] (see full text of the decision).

42. See [SWITZERLAND Bundesgericht [Federal Supreme Court] 11 July 2000, available online at ]; CLOUT case No. 261 [SWITZERLAND Bezirksgericht [District Court] Sanne 20 February 1997; available at ].

43. See CLOUT case No. 378 [ITALY Tribunale [District Court] Vigevano 12 July 2000, available online at ] (see full text of the decision); CLOUT case No. 189 [AUSTRIA Oberster Gerichtshof [Supreme Court] 20 March 1997, available online at ] (see full text of the decision).

44. See CLOUT case No. 268 [GERMANY Bundesgerichtshof [Supreme Court] 11 December 1996, available online at ] (see full text of the decision).

45. For recent court decisions applying the Convention by virtue of art. 1(1)(a), see [BELGIUM Hof van Beroep [Appellate Court] Gent 31 January 2002, available online at ]; CLOUT case No. 398 [FRANCE Cour d'appel [Appellate Court] Orleans 29 March 2001, available online at ] (see full text of the decision); [GERMANY Landgericht [District Court] Trier 7 December 2000, available online at ]; [GERMANY Oberlandesgericht [Appellate Court] Oldenburg 5 December 2000, available online at ]; [GERMANY Landgericht [District Court] Stendal 12 October 2000, available online at ]; [FRANCE Tribunal [District Court] Montargis 6 October 2000, available online at ]; [AUSTRIA Oberster Gerichtshof [Supreme Court] 7 September 2000, available online at ]; [GERMANY Oberlandesgericht [Appellate Court] Frankfurt 30 August 2000, available online at ]; [MEXICO State of Baja California [Sixth Civil Court] Tijuana 14 July 2000, available online at ]; CLOUT case No. 378 [ITALY Tribunale [District Court] Vigevano 12 July 2000, available online at ] (see full text of the decision); [AUSTRIA Oberster Gerichtshof [Supreme Court] 28 April 2000, available online at ]; [AUSTRIA Oberster Gerichtshof [Supreme Court] 13 April 2000, available online at ]; [SPAIN Audiencia Provincial [Appellate Court] Navarra 27 March 2000, available online at ]; [AUSTRIA Oberster Gerichtshof [Supreme Court] 21 March 2000, available online at ]; [AUSTRIA Oberster Gerichtshof [Supreme Court] 9 March 2000, available online at ]; [GERMANY Oberlandesgericht [Appellate Court] Stuttgart 28 February 2000, available online at ]; CLOUT case No. 395 [SPAIN Tribunal Supremo [Supreme Court] 28 January 2000, available online at ] (see full text of the decision); [GERMANY Oberlandesgericht [Appellate Court] 26 January 2000, available online at ]; CLOUT case No. 416 [UNITED STATES KSTP-FM v. Specialized Communications Federal District Court [Minnesota] 9 March 1999, available online at ] (see full text of the decision); [GERMANY Oberlandesgericht [Appellate Court] München 3 December 1999, available online at ]; [GERMANY Oberlandesgericht [Appellate Court] Koblenz 18 November 1999, available online at ]; [AUSTRIA Oberster Gerichtshof [Supreme Court] 12 November 1998, available online at ]; CLOUT case No. 319 [GERMANY Bundesgerichtshof [Supreme Court] 3 November 1999, available online at ] (see full text of the decision); [FRANCE Cour d'appel [Appellate Court] Grenoble 21 October 1999, available online at ]; CLOUT case No. 328 [SWITZERLAND Kantonsgericht [District Court] Zug 21 October 1999, available online at ]; [SWITZERLAND Kanton [Appellate Court] Basel-Landschaft 5 October 1999, available online at ]; CLOUT case No. 341 [CANADA La San Giuseppe v. Forti Moulding Ltd. [Ontario Superior Court of Justice] 31 August 1999, available online at ] (see full text of the decision); [AUSTRIA Oberster Gerichtshof [Supreme Court] 27 August 1999, available online at ]; [AUSTRIA Oberster Gerichtshof [Supreme Court] 29 June 1999, available online at ]; CLOUT case No. 333 [SWITZERLAND Handelsgericht [Commercial Court] Aargau 11 June 1999, available online at ] (see full text of the decision); [SWITZERLAND Cantone del Ticino [Appellate Court] Lugano 8 June 1999, available online at ]; CLOUT case No. 315 [FRANCE Cour de Cassation [Supreme Court] 26 May 1999, available online at ] (see full text of the decision); CLOUT case No. 265 [HUNGARY Budapest Arbitration Award case No. Vb 97142 of 25 May 1999, available online at ]; CLOUT case No. 314 [FRANCE Cour d'appel [Appellate Court] Paris 21 May 1999, available online at ]; [AUSTRIA Oberster Gerichtshof [Supreme Court] 11 March 1999, available online at ]; CLOUT case No. 418 [UNITED STATES Medical Marketing v. Internazionale Medico Scientifica Federal District Court [Louisiana] 17 May 1999, available online at ]; [GERMANY Oberlandesgericht [Appellate Court] Naumburg 27 April 1999, available online at ]; CLOUT case No. 325 [SWITZERLAND Handelsgericht [Commercial Court] Zürich 8 April 1999, available online at ] (see full text of the decision); CLOUT case No. 271 [GERMANY Landgericht [District Court] Zwickau 19 March 1999, available online at ]; CLOUT case No. 306 [AUSTRIA Oberster Gerichtshof [Supreme Court] 11 March 1999, available online at ]; CLOUT case No. 327 [SWITZERLAND Kantonsgericht [District Court] Zug 25 February 1999, available online at ] (see full text of the decision); CLOUT case No. 331 [SWITZERLAND Handelsgericht [Commercial Court] Zürich 10 February 1999, available online at ] (see full text of the decision); CLOUT case No. 243 [FRANCE Cour d'appel [Appellate Court] Grenoble 4 February 1999, available online at ] (see full text of the decision); CLOUT case No. 293 [GERMANY Hamburg Arbitration award of 29 December 1998 available online at ]; CLOUT case No. 339 [GERMANY Landgericht [District Court] Regensburg 24 September 1998, available online at ] (see full text of the decision); [ITALY Corte di Appello [Appellate Court] Milano 11 December 1998, available online at ]; [MEXICO Compromex Arbitration Award 30 November 1998, available online at ]; CLOUT case No. 346 [GERMANY Landgericht [District Court] Mainz 26 November 1998, available online at ]; CLOUT case No. 270 [GERMANY Bundesgerichtshof [Supreme Court] 25 November 1998, available online at ]; CLOUT case No. 248 [SWITZERLAND Bundesgericht [Supreme Court] 28 October 1998, available online at ] (see full text of the decision); CLOUT case No. 419 [UNITED STATES Mitchell Aircraft Spares v. European Aircraft Service Federal District Court [Louisiana] 27 October 1998, available online at ] (see full text of the decision); CLOUT case No. 244 [FRANCE Cour d'appel [Appellate Court] Paris 4 March 1998, available online at ] (see full text of the decision); CLOUT case No. 240 [AUSTRIA Oberster Gerichtshof [Supreme Court] 15 October 1998, available online at ]; [GERMANY Oberlandesgericht [Appellate Court] Oldenburg 22 September 1998, available online at ]; CLOUT case No. 252 [SWITZERLAND Handelsgericht [Commercial Court] Zürich 21 September 1998, available online at ] (see full text of the decision); CLOUT case No. 263 [SWITZERLAND Bezirksgericht [District Court] Unterrheintal 16 September 1998, available online at ] (see full text of the decision); CLOUT case No. 285 [GERMANY Oberlandesgericht [Appellate Court] Koblenz 11 September 1998, available online at ] (see full text of the decision); CLOUT case No. 318 [GERMANY Oberlandesgericht [Appellate Court] Celle 2 September 1998, available online at ] (see full text of the decision); [GERMANY Oberlandesgericht [Appellate Court] Bamberg 19 August 1998, available online at ]; [ITALY Corte Suprema di Cassazione [Supreme Court] 7 August 1998 available online at ]; CLOUT case No. 344 [GERMANY Landgericht [District Court] Erfurt 29 July 1998, available online at ] (see full text of the decision); CLOUT case No. 242 [FRANCE Cour de Cassation [Supreme Court] 16 July 1998, available online at ] (see full text of the decision); CLOUT case No. 305 [AUSTRIA Oberster Gerichtshof [Supreme Court] 30 June 1998, available online at ] (see full text of the decision); CLOUT case No. 255 [SWITZERLAND Tribunal Cantonal [Appellate Court] Valais / Wallis 30 June 1998, available online at ] (see full text of the decision); CLOUT case No. 222 [UNITED STATES MCC-Marble Ceramic Center v. Ceramica Nuova D'Agostino, Federal Appellate Court [11th Circuit] 29 June 1998, available online at ] (see full text of the decision); CLOUT case No. 256 [SWITZERLAND Tribunal Cantonal [Appellate Court] Valais 29 June 1998, available online at ] (see full text of the decision); [AUSTRIA Oberster Gerichtshof [Supreme Court] 25 June 1998, available online at ]; CLOUT case No. 338 [GERMANY Oberlandesgericht [Appellate Court] Hamm 23 June 1998, available online at ] (see full text of the decision); CLOUT case No. 237 [STOCKHOLM CHAMBER OF COMMERCE Arbitration Award of 5 June 1998; available online at ] (see full text of the decision); CLOUT case No. 290 [GERMANY Oberlandesgericht [Appellate Court] Saarbrücken 3 June 1998, available online at ] (see full text of the decision); CLOUT case No. 280 [GERMANY Oberlandesgericht [Appellate Court] Jena 26 May 1998, available online at ] (see full text of the decision); [GERMANY Landgericht [District Court] Aurich 8 May 1998, available online at ]; [ITALY Corte di Cassazione [Supreme Court] 8 May 1998, available online at ]; CLOUT case No. 413 [UNITED STATES Calzaturificio Claudia v. Olivieri Footwear Federal District Court [New York] 6 April 1998, available online at ] (see full text of the decision); CLOUT case No. 272 [GERMANY Oberlandesgericht [Appellate Court] Zweibrücken 31 March 1998, available online at ] (see full text of the decision); CLOUT case No. 245 [FRANCE Cour d'appel [Appellate Court] Paris 18 March 1998, available online at ] (see full text of the decision); CLOUT case No. 232 [GERMANY Oberlandesgericht [Appellate Court] München 11 March 1998, available online at ]; [AUSTRIA Oberster Gerichtshof [Supreme Court] 10 March 1998, available online at ]; [NETHERLANDS Hoge Raad [Supreme Court] 20 February 1998, available online at ]; CLOUT case No. 269 [GERMANY Bundesgerichtshof [Supreme Court] 12 February 1998, available online at ] (see full text of the decision); [BULGARIA Arbitration case No. 11/1996 Bulgarian Chamber of Commerce and Industry 12 February 1998, available online at ]; [GERMANY Landgericht [District Court] Bückeburg 3 February 1998, available online at ]; CLOUT case No. 288 [GERMANY Oberlandesgericht [Appellate Court] München 28 January 1998, available online at ] (see full text of the decision); CLOUT case No. 259 [SWITZERLAND Kantonsgericht [Canton Court] Freiburg 23 January 1998, available online at ] (see full text of the decision); CLOUT case No. 297 [GERMANY Oberlandesgericht [Appellate Court] München 21 January 1998, available online at ] (see full text of the decision); [FRANCE Tribunal [District Court] Besançon 19 January 1998, available online at ]; CLOUT case No. 253 [SWITZERLAND Cantone del Ticino [Appellate Court] Lugano 15 January 1998, available online at ] (see full text of the decision); CLOUT case No. 312 [FRANCE Cour d'appel [Appellate Court] Paris 14 January 1998, available online at ]; CLOUT case No. 257 [SWITZERLAND Tribunal Cantonal [Appellate Court] Vaud 24 December 1997, available online at ] (see full text of the decision); CLOUT case No. 254 [SWITZERLAND Handelsgericht [Commercial Court] Aargau 19 December 1997; available at ] (see full text of the decision); [FRANCE Tribunal [District Court] Colmar 18 December 1997, available online at ]; [GERMANY Landgericht [District Court] Bayreuth 11 December 1997, available online at ]; [AUSTRIA Vienna Arbitration proceeding award No. S 2/97 of 10 December 1997, available online at ]; CLOUT case No. 220 [SWITZERLAND Kantonsgericht [District Court] Nidwalden 3 December 1997, available online at ] (see full text of the decision); CLOUT case No. 221 [SWITZERLAND Zivilgericht [Civil Court] Basel-Stadt 3 December 1997, available online at ] (see full text of the decision); CLOUT case No. 207 [FRANCE Cour de Cassation [Supreme Court] 2 December 1997, available online at ] (see full text of the decision); CLOUT case No. 295 [GERMANY Oberlandesgericht [Appellate Court] Hamm 5 November 1997, available online at ]; CLOUT case No. 246 [SPAIN Audiencia Provincial [Appellate Court] Barcelona 3 November 1997, available online at ] (see full text of the decision); CLOUT case No. 247 [SPAIN Audiencia Provincial [Appellate Court] Córdoba 31 October 1997, available online at ] (see full text of the decision); CLOUT case No. 219 [SWITZERLAND Tribunal Cantonal [Appellate Court] Valais 28 October 1997, available online at ] (see full text of the decision); [FRANCE Tribunal [District Court] Paris 28 October 1997, available online at ]; [GERMANY Landgericht [District Court] Erfurt 28 October 1997, available online at ]; CLOUT case No. 218 [SWITZERLAND Kantonsgericht [District Court] Zug 16 October 1997, available online at ] (see full text of the decision); [GERMANY Landgericht [District Court] Hagen 15 October 1997, available online at ]; CLOUT case No. 248 [SWITZERLAND Bundesgericht [Supreme Court] 28 October 1998, available online at ] (see full text of the decision); [NETHERLANDS Gerechtshof [Appellate Court] s'Hertogenbosch 2 October 1997, available online at ]; [NETHERLANDS Hoge Raad [Supreme Court] 26 September 1997, available online at ]; CLOUT case No. 217 [SWITZERLAND Handelsgericht [Commercial Court] 26 September 1997; available at ] (see full text of the decision); CLOUT case No. 345 [GERMANY Landgericht [District Court] Heilbronn 15 September 1997; available at ]; CLOUT case No. 307 [AUSTRIA Oberster Gerichtshof [Supreme Court] 11 September 1997, available online at ] (see full text of the decision); [AUSTRIA Oberlandesgericht [Appellate Court] Linz 8 September 1997, available online at ]; CLOUT case No. 284 [GERMANY Oberlandesgericht [Appellate Court] Köln 21 August 1997, available online at ] (see full text of the decision); CLOUT case No. 216 [SWITZERLAND Kantonsgericht [District Court] St. Gallen 12 August 1997, available online at ] (see full text of the decision); [GERMANY Landgericht [District Court] Göttingen 31 July 1997, available online at ]; [NETHERLANDS Gerechtshof [Appellate Court] s'Hertogenbosch 24 July 1997, available online at ]; CLOUT case No. 187 [UNITED STATES Helen Kaminski v. Marketing Australian Products Federal District Court [New York] 21 July 1997, available online at ] (see full text of the decision); CLOUT case No. 236 [GERMANY Bundesgerichtshof [Supreme Court] 23 July 1997, available online at ] (see full text of the decision); [GERMANY Landgericht [District Court] Saarbrücken 18 July 1997, available online at ]; [NETHERLANDS Rechtbank [District Court] Arnhem 17 July 1997, available online at ]; CLOUT case No. 273 [GERMANY Oberlandesgericht [Appellate Court] München 9 July 1997; available at ] (see full text of the decision); CLOUT case No. 287 [GERMANY Oberlandesgericht [Appellate Court] München 9 July 1997, available online at ]; CLOUT case No. 215 [SWITZERLAND Bezirksgericht [District Court] St. Gallen 3 July 1997, available online at ] (see full text of the decision); CLOUT case No. 172 [HUNGARY Fovárosi Biróság [Metropolitan Court] Budapest 1 July 1997, available online at ] (see full text of the decision); CLOUT case No. 235 [GERMANY Bundesgerichtshof [Supreme Court] 25 June 1997, available online at ] (see full text of the decision); CLOUT case No. 230 [GERMANY Oberlandesgericht [Appellate Court] Karlsruhe 25 June 1997, available online at ]; [GERMANY Landgericht [District Court] Hamburg 19 June 1997, available online at ]; CLOUT case No. 239 [AUSTRIA Oberster Gerichtshof [Supreme Court] 18 June 1997, available online at ]; CLOUT case No. 173 [HUNGARY Fovárosi Biróság [Metropolitan Court] Budapest 17 June 1997, available online at ] (see full text of the decision); [NETHERLANDS Gerechtshof [Appellate Court] Arnhem 17 June 1997, available online at ]; [GERMANY Landgericht [District Court] Paderborn 10 June 1997, available online at ]; CLOUT case No. 174 [HUNGARY Budapest Arbitration Award case No. Vb 96038 of 8 May 1997, available online at ]; [GERMANY Landgericht [District Court] München 6 May 1997, available online at ]; CLOUT case No. 275 [GERMANY Oberlandesgericht [Appellate Court] Düsseldorf 24 April 1997, available online at ] (see full text of the decision); [GERMANY Landgericht [District Court] Frankenthal 17 April 1997, available online at ]; CLOUT case No. 189 [AUSTRIA Oberster Gerichtshof [Supreme Court] 20 March 1997, available online at ] (see full text of the decision); [NETHERLANDS Rechtbank [District Court] Zwolle 5 March 1997, available online at ]; CLOUT case No. 261 [SWITZERLAND Bezirksgericht [District Court] Sanne 20 February 1997; available at ]; CLOUT case No. 396 [SPAIN Audiencia Provincial [Appellate Court] Barcelona 4 February 1997, available online at ] (see full text of the decision); CLOUT case No. 282 [GERMANY Oberlandesgericht [Appellate Court] Koblenz 31 January 1997; available at ] (see full text of the decision); [ITALY Pretura [District Court] Torino 30 January 1997 available online at ]; CLOUT case No. 192 [SWITZERLAND Obergericht [Appellate Court] Luzern 8 January 1997, available online at ] (see full text of the decision); CLOUT case No. 311 [GERMANY Oberlandesgericht [Appellate Court] Köln 8 January 1997; available at ] (see full text of the decision); CLOUT case No. 206 [FRANCE Cour de Cassation [Supreme Court] 17 December 1996, available online at ] (see full text of the decision); [BELGIUM Rechtbank [District Court] Kortrijk 16 December 1996, available online at ]; CLOUT case No. 268 [GERMANY Bundesgerichtshof [Supreme Court] 11 December 1996, available online at ]; [GERMANY Landgericht [District Court] München 9 December 1996, available online at ]; CLOUT case No. 229 [GERMANY Bundesgerichtshof [Supreme Court] 4 December 1996, available online at ]; [GERMANY Amtsgericht [Lower Court] Koblenz 12 November 1996, available online at ]; [AUSTRIA Oberlandesgericht [Appellate Court] Wien 7 November 1996, available online at ]; [GERMANY Landgericht [District Court] Heidelberg 2 October 1996, available online at ]; [GERMANY Oberlandesgericht [Appellate Court] Düsseldorf 13 September 1996, available online at ]; CLOUT case No. 169 [GERMANY Oberlandesgericht [Appellate Court] Düsseldorf 11 July 1996, available online at ] (see full text of the decision); CLOUT case No. 193 [SWITZERLAND Handelsgericht [Commercial Court] Zürich 10 July 1996, available online at ] (see full text of the decision); [GERMANY Landgericht [District Court] Paderborn 25 June 1996, available online at ]; [GERMANY Amtsgericht [Lower Court] Bottropp 25 June 1996,, available online at ]; [GERMANY Landgericht [District Court] Hamburg 17 June 1996, available online at ]; CLOUT case No. 168 [GERMANY Oberlandesgericht [Appellate Court] Köln 21 May 1996, available online at ] (see full text of the decision); CLOUT case No. 143 [HUNGARY Fovárosi Biróság [Metropolitan Court] Budapest 21 May 1996, available online at ]; CLOUT case No. 204 [FRANCE Cour d'appel [Appellate Court] Grenoble 15 May 1996, available online at ]; [BULGARIA Arbitration case No. 56/1995 Bulgarian Chamber of Commerce and Industry 24 April 1996, available online at ]; [GERMANY Landgericht [District Court] Aachen 19 April 1996, available online at ]; [GERMANY Landgericht [District Court] Duisburg 17 April 1996, available online at ]; CLOUT case No. 171 [GERMANY Bundesgerichtshof [Supreme Court] 3 April 1996, available online at ] (see full text of the decision); CLOUT case No. 337 [GERMANY Landgericht [District Court] Saarbrücken 26 March 1996, available online at ]; [ITALY Tribunale [District Court] Busto Arsizio 13 December 2001, available online at ] (Ecuador and Italy); [ITALY Corte di Appello [Appellate Court] Milano 23 January 2001, available online at ]. (Finland and Italy, question not regarding part II of Convention).

46. United Nations Conference on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods, Vienna, 10 March - 11 April 1980, Official Records, Documents of the Conference and Summary Records of the Plenary Meetings and of the Meetings of the Main Committee, 1981, 15.

47. For an analysis of the issue of exclusion of the Convention, see the comments to article 6.

48. See CLOUT case No. 309 [DENMARK Østre Landsret [Appellate Court] 23 April 1998, available online at ]; CLOUT case No. 143 [HUNGARY Fovárosi Biróság [Metropolitan Court] Budapest 21 May 1996, available online at ]; CLOUT case No. 228 [GERMANY Oberlandesgericht [Appellate Court] Rostock 27 July 1995, available online at ]; [ICC Court of Arbitration, case No. 7585 of 1992, available online at ].

49. United Nations Conference on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods, Vienna, 10 March - 11 April 1980, Official Records, Documents of the Conference and Summary Records of the Plenary Meetings and of the Meetings of the Main Committee, 1981, 15.

50. For cases referring to art. 1(1)(b), see [AUSTRALIA Downs Investments v. Perwaja Steel [Supreme Court of Queensland] 17 November 2000, available online at ] (Malaysian and Australian parties chose law applying in Brisbane); [ARGENTINA Cámara Nacional de los Apelaciones en lo Comercial [Appellate Court] 24 April 2000, available online at ]; CLOUT case No. 400 [FRANCE Cour d'appel [Appellate Court] Colmar 24 October 2000, available online at ]; [ITALY Tribunale [District Court] Pavia 29 December 1999, available online at ]; CLOUT case No. 348 [GERMANY Oberlandesgericht [Appellate Court] Hamburg 26 November 1999, available online at ] (see full text of the decision); CLOUT case No. 294 [GERMANY Oberlandesgericht [Appellate Court] Bamberg 13 January 1999, available online at ] (see full text of the decision); CLOUT case No. 251 [SWITZERLAND Handelsgericht [Commercial Court] Zürich 30 November 1998, available online at ]; CLOUT case No. 274 [GERMANY Oberlandesgericht [Appellate Court] Celle 11 November 1998, available online at ]; CLOUT case No. 309 [DENMARK Østre Landsret [Eastern Appellate Court] 23 April 1998, available online at ]; [ITALY Corte d'Appello [Appellate Court] Milano 20 March 1998, available online at ]; CLOUT case No. 238 [AUSTRIA Oberster Gerichtshof [Supreme Court] 12 February 1998, available online at ]; CLOUT case No. 224 [FRANCE Cour de Cassation [Supreme Court] 27 January 1998, available online at ] (see full text of the decision); [NETHERLANDS Hoge Raad [Supreme Court] 7 November 1997, available online at ]; [BELGIUM Rechtbank [District Court] Kortrijk 6 October 1997, available online at ]; CLOUT case No. 283 [GERMANY Oberlandesgericht [Appellate Court] Köln 9 July 1997, available online at ]; [NETHERLANDS Rechtbank [District Court] Zutphen 29 May 1997, available online at ]; CLOUT case No. 227 [GERMANY Oberlandesgericht [Appellate Court] Hamm 22 September 1992, available online at ] (see full text of the decision); CLOUT case No. 214 [SWITZERLAND Handelsgericht [Commercial Court] Zürich 5 February 1997; available at ] (see full text of the decision); [BELGIUM Rechtbank [District Court] Kortrijk 6 January 1997, available online at ]; [FRANCE Cour d'appel [Appellate Court] Grenoble 23 October 1996, available online at ]; [BELGIUM Rechtbank [District Court] Haaselt 9 October 1996, available online at ]; [GERMANY Arbitration Hamburg 21 June 1996, available online at ]; [NETHERLANDS Gerechtshof [Appellate Court] Leeuwarden 5 June 1996, available online at ]; [GERMANY Landgericht [District Court] Oldenbrug 27 March 1996, available online at ]; CLOUT case No. 166 [GERMANY Hamburg Arbitration award of 21 March / 21 June 1996; available at / ]; [GERMANY Landgericht [District Court] Bad Kreuznach 12 March 1996, available online at ]; CLOUT case No. 176 [AUSTRIA Oberster Gerichtshof [Supreme Court] 6 February 1996, available online at ] (see full text of the decision); [GERMANY Landgericht [District Court] Siege 5 December 1995, available online at ]; [BELGIUM Rechtbank [District Court] Hasselt 8 November 1995, available online at ]; [GERMANY Landgericht [District Court] Hamburg 23 October 1995, available online at ]; [BELGIUM Rechtbank [District Court] Hasselt 18 October 1995, available online at ]; [BELGIUM Tribunal [District Court] Nivelles 19 September 1995, available online at ]; [NETHERLANDS Rechtbank [District Court] Almelo 9 August 1995, available online at ]; CLOUT case No. 276 [GERMANY Oberlandesgericht [Appellate Court] Frankfurt 5 July 1995, available online at ] (see full text of the decision); CLOUT case No. 262 [SWITZERLAND Gerichtskommission Oberrheintal Kanton St. Gallen 30 June 1995, available online at ]; [GERMANY Landgericht [District Court] Kassel 22 June 1995, available online at ]; CLOUT case No. 152 [FRANCE Cour d'appel [Appellate Court] Grenoble 26 April 1995, available online at ]; [GERMANY Amtsgericht [Lower Court] Wangen 8 March 1995, available online at ]; [NETHERLANDS Rechtbank [District Court] Zwolle 1 March 1995, available online at ]; [NETHERLANDS Rechtbank [District Court] Middelburg 25 January 1995, available online at ]; CLOUT case No. 155 [FRANCE Cour de Cassation [Supreme Court] 4 January 1995, available online at ] (see full text of the decision); [GERMANY Amtsgericht [Lower Court] Mayen 6 September 1994, available online at ]; [GERMANY Landgericht [District Court] Düsseldorf 25 August 1994, available online at ]; [ICC Court of Arbitration, case No. 7660 of 1994, available online at ]; CLOUT case No. 93 [AUSTRIA Vienna Arbitration Award, case No. SCH-4366 of 15 June 1994; available online at ]; CLOUT case No. 94 [AUSTRIA Vienna Arbitration Award, case No. SCH-4318 of 15 June 1994; available online at ] ; CLOUT case No. 92 [ITALY Ad hoc Arbitral Tribunal Florence 19 April 1994, available online at ]; CLOUT case No. 120 [GERMANY Oberlandesgericht [Appellate Court] Köln 22 February 1994, available online at ] (see full text of the decision); CLOUT case No. 81 [GERMANY Oberlandesgericht [Appellate Court] Düsseldorf 10 February 1994, available online at ]; CLOUT case No. 80 [GERMANY Kammergericht [Appellate Court] Berlin 24 January 1994, available online at ]; CLOUT case No. 100 [NETHERLANDS Rechtbank [District Court] Arnhem 30 December 1993, available online at ]; CLOUT case No. 156 [FRANCE Cour d'appel [Appellate Court] Paris 10 November 1993, available online at ] (see full text of the decision); CLOUT case No. 281 [GERMANY Oberlandesgericht [Appellate Court] Koblenz 17 September 1993, available online at ]; CLOUT case No. 49 [GERMANY Oberlandesgericht [Appellate Court] Düsseldorf 2 July 1993, available online at ]; CLOUT case No. 25 [FRANCE Cour d'appel [Appellate Court] Grenoble 16 June 1993, available online at ]; CLOUT case No. 201 [SWITZERLAND Richteramt [District Court] Laufen des Kantons Berne 7 May 1993, available online at ]; CLOUT case No. 310 [GERMANY Oberlandesgericht [Appellate Court] Düsseldorf 12 March 1993, available online at ]; CLOUT case No. 99 [NETHERLANDS Rechtbank [District Court] Arnhem 25 February 1993, available online at ]; CLOUT case No. 292 [GERMANY Oberlandesgericht [Appellate Court] Saarbrücken 13 January 1993, available online at ] (see full text of the decision); CLOUT case No. 48 [GERMANY Oberlandesgericht [Appellate Court] Düsseldorf 8 January 1993, available online at ]; CLOUT case No. 95 [SWITZERLAND Zivilgericht [Civil Court] Basel-Stadt 21 December 1992, available online at ] (see full text of the decision); CLOUT case No. 317 [GERMANY Oberlandesgericht [Appellate Court] Karlsruhe 20 November 1992, available online at ]; CLOUT case No. 227 [GERMANY Oberlandesgericht [Appellate Court] Hamm 22 September 1992, available online at ] (see full text of the decision); CLOUT case No. 56 [SWITZERLAND Canton of Ticino [District Court] Locarno Campagna 27 April 1992, available online at ] (see full text of the decision); CLOUT case No. 158 [FRANCE Cour d'appel [Appellate Court] Paris 22 April 1992, available online at ]; CLOUT case No. 98 [NETHERLANDS Rechtbank [District Court] Roermond 19 December 1991, available online at ]; CLOUT case No. 55 [SWITZERLAND Pretore della giurisdizione [District Court] Locarno 16 December 1991, available online at ]; CLOUT case No. 316 [GERMANY Oberlandesgericht [Appellate Court] Koblenz 27 September 1991, available online at ]; CLOUT case No. 2 [GERMANY Oberlandesgericht [Appellate Court] Frankfurt 17 September 1991, available online at ] (see full text of the decision).

51. See CLOUT case No. 378 [ITALY Tribunale [District Court] Vigevano 12 July 2000, available online at ] (see full text of the decision).

52. For the text of this convention, see Official Journal L 266 , 9 October 1980, 1 et seq.

53. See [BELGIUM Hof van Beroep [Appellate Court] Gent 15 May 2002, available online at ]; CLOUT case No. 409 [GERMANY Landgericht [District Court] Kassel 15 February 1996, available online at ] (see full text of the decision); [ICC Court of Arbitration, case No. 8324 of 1995, available online at ]; [NETHERLANDS Rechtbank [District Court] s'Gravenhage 7 June 1995, available online at ]; CLOUT case No. 48 [GERMANY Oberlandesgericht [Appellate Court] Düsseldorf 8 January 1993, available online at ]; CLOUT case No. 281 [GERMANY Oberlandesgericht [Appellate Court] Koblenz 17 September 1993, available online at ].

54. See article 3 of the Rome Convention:

"1. A contract shall be governed by the law chosen by the parties. The choice must be expressed or demonstrated with reasonable certainty by the terms of the contract or the circumstances of the case. By their choice the parties can select the law applicable to the whole or a part only of the contract.

2. The parties may at any time agree to subject the contract to a law other than that which previously governed it, whether as a result of an earlier choice under this article or of other provisions of this Convention. Any variation by the parties of the law to be applied made after the conclusion of the contract shall not prejudice its formal validity under article 9 or adversely affect the rights of third parties.

3. The fact that the parties have chosen a foreign law, whether or not accompanied by the choice of a foreign tribunal, shall not, where all the other elements relevant to the situation at the time of the choice are connected with one country only, prejudice the application of rules of the law of that country which cannot be derogated from by contract, hereinafter called "mandatory rules".

4. The existence and validity of the consent of the parties as to the choice of the applicable law shall be determined in accordance with the provisions of Articles 8, 9 and 11."

55. 1955 Hague Convention on the Law Applicable to International Sale of Goods, 510 U.N.T.S. 149, No. 7411 (1964).

56. See article 2 of the Hague Convention:

"A sale shall be governed by the domestic law of the country designated by the Contracting Parties.
Such designation must be contained in an express clause, or unambiguously result from the provisions of the contract.
Conditions affecting the consent of the parties to the law declared applicable shall be determined by such law."

57. For cases applying the United Nations Sales Convention by virtue of a choice of law acknowledged by the judges on the grounds of article 2 of the 1995 Hague Convention, see [BELGIUM Tribunal [District Court] Bruxelles 13 November 1992, available online at ].

See, for example, [NETHERLANDS Arbitration Institute Award Case No. 2319 of 15 October 2002, available online at ].

59. For cases referring to the "closest connection", see CLOUT case No. 81 [GERMANY Oberlandesgericht [Appellate Court] Düsseldorf 10 February 1994, available online at ] (see full text of the decision); [GERMANY Landgericht [District Court] Düsseldorf 25 August 1994, available online at ]; [NETHERLANDS Rechtbank [District Court] Roermond 6 May 1993, available online at ]; CLOUT case No. 316 [GERMANY Oberlandesgericht [Appellate Court] Koblenz 27 September 1991, available online at ] (see full text of the decision); CLOUT case No. 1 [GERMANY Oberlandesgericht [Appellate Court] Frankfurt 13 June 1991, available online at ] (see full text of the decision).

60. For cases expressly pointing out that the seller is the party that has to effect the characteristic performance, see [GERMANY Landgericht [District Court] Berlin 24 March 1998, available online at ]; [GERMANY Landgericht [District Court] München 6 May 1997, available online at ]; [NETHERLANDS Rechtbank [District Court] Amsterdam 5 October 1994, available online at ]; CLOUT case No. 81 [GERMANY Oberlandesgericht [Appellate Court] Düsseldorf 10 February 1994, available online at ] (see full text of the decision); CLOUT case No. 310 [GERMANY Oberlandesgericht [Appellate Court] Düsseldorf 12 March 1993, available online at ] (see full text of the decision); CLOUT case No. 6 [GERMANY Landgericht [District Court] Frankfurt 16 September 1991, available online at ] (see full text of the decision); [GERMANY Landgericht [District Court] Frankfurt 2 May 1990, available online at ].

61. For cases applying the Convention on the basis of the presumption referred to in the text, see, e.g., [BELGIUM Cour d'appel [Appellate Court] Mons 8 March 2001, available online at ]; [GERMANY Landgericht [District Court] Bad Kreuznach 12 March 1996, available online at ]; [GERMANY Landgericht [District Court] Frankfurt 6 July 1994, available online at ]; CLOUT case No. 50 [GERMANY Landgericht [District Court] Baden-Baden 14 August 1991, available online at ] (see full text of the decision).

62. See [BELGIUM Rechtbank [District Court] Hasselt 9 October 1996, available online at ]; [BELGIUM Rechtbank [District Court] Hasselt 8 November 1995, available online at ]; CLOUT case No. 152 [FRANCE Cour d'appel [Appellate Court] Grenoble 26 April 1995, available online at ]; [BELGIUM Rechtbank [District Court] Hasselt 18 October 1995, available online at ]; [BELGIUM Tribunal [District Court] Bruxelles 5 October 1994, available online at ]; [SWITZERLAND Tribunal Cantonal [Appellate Court] Vaud 6 December 1993, available online at ]; CLOUT case No. 201 [SWITZERLAND Richteramt [District Court] Laufen des Kantons Berne 7 May 1993, available online at ]; CLOUT case No. 56 [SWITZERLAND Pretore della giurisdizione [District Court ] Locarno Campagna 27 April 1992, available online at ] (see full text of the decision).

63. [FRANCE Cour de Cassation [Supreme Court] 26 June 2001, available online at ]; Trib. Verona, 19 December 1997, Rivista veronese di giurisprudenza economica e dell'impresa 1998, 22 ff.

64. United Nations Conference on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods, Vienna, 10 March - 11 April 1980, Official Records, Documents of the Conference and Summary Records of the Plenary Meetings and of the Meetings of the Main Committee, 1981, 229.

65. To date the following States have declared an article 95 reservation: Canada (for province of British Colombia only), China, Czech Republic, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Singapore, Slovakia, United States of America. GERMANY has stated a declaration that it will not apply Article 1(1)(b) in respect of any State that has made a declaration that it would not apply Article 1(1)(b).

66. See CLOUT case No. 417 [UNITED STATES Magellan International v. Salzgitter Handel Federal District Court [Illinois] 7 December 1999, available online at ]; CLOUT case No. 416 [UNITED STATES KSTP-FM v. Specialized Communications Federal District Court [Minnesota] 9 March 1999, available online at ]; CLOUT case No. 419 [UNITED STATES Mitchell Aircraft Spares v. European Aircraft Service Federal District Court [Louisiana] 27 October 1998, available online at ]; CLOUT case No. 222 [UNITED STATES MCC-Marble Ceramic Center v. Ceramica Nuova D'Agostino, Federal Appellate Court [11th Circuit] 29 June 1998, available online at ]; CLOUT case No. 413 [UNITED STATES Calzaturificio Claudia v. Olivieri Footwear Federal District Court [New York] 6 April 1998, available online at ]; CLOUT case No. 187 [UNITED STATES Helen Kaminski v. Marketing Australian Products Federal District Court [New York] 21 July 1997, available online at ]; CLOUT case No. 138 [UNITED STATES Delchi Carrier v. Rotorex, Federal Appellate Court [2nd Circuit] 6 December 1995, available online at ]; CLOUT case No. 86 [UNITED STATES Graves v. Chilewich Federal District Court [New York] 22 September 1994, available online at ]; CLOUT case No. 85 [UNITED STATES Delchi Carrier v. Rotorex Federal District Court [New York] 9 September 1994, available online at ]; CLOUT case No. 24 [UNITED STATES Beijing Metals v. American Business Center, Federal Appellate Court [5th Circuit] 15 June 1993, available online at ]; CLOUT case No. 23 [UNITED STATES Filanto v. Chilewich Federal District Court [New York] 14 April 1992, available online at ].

67. See [BELGIUM Rechtbank [District Court] Kortrijk 16 December 1996, available online at ]; [BELGIUM Rechtbank [District Court] Haaselt 9 October 1996, available online at

Analiza economica a dreptului international al contractelor (eng)

PREZENTUL REZUMAT DIN LITERATURA JURIDICA INDICATA CA SI BIBLIOGRAFIE ESTE EXCLUSIV DESTINATA APROFUNDARII DISCIPLINEI DE CATRE STUDENTII FSEGA AI UBB. ORICE FOLOSIRE NECONFORMA CU SCOPUL PREZENTAT MAI SUS EXONEREAZA DE RASPUNDERE TITULARUL BLOGULUI.

Research Handbook in
International Economic Law, 2007
Edited by
Andrew T. Guzman
Professor of Law, Boalt Hall School of Law, University of
California, Berkeley, USA
and
Alan O. Sykes
Professor of Law, Stanford University, USA
RESEARCH HANDBOOKS IN INTERNATIONAL LAW
Edward Elgar
Cheltenham, UK • Northampton, MA, USA2. The economic analysis of international commercial law
2.1. Contract law
The basic terms of commercial transactions are regulated by contract law.
Contract law, both in its domestic and international incarnations, is not a
unified whole in that one set of rules governs all contracts. Transactions
involving the sales of goods have been singled out for special treatment. In the
United States, sales are governed by Article 2 of the Uniform Commercial Code.
Internationally, the United Nations, through UNCITRAL, has
promulgated the United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International
Sales of Goods (CISG). By its terms, the CISG applies whenever the contracting
parties have places of business in countries that have adopted the CISG, or
when the contracting parties have businesses in different countries and international
choice of law rules point to a country that has signed the CISG.18
The parties, however, have the ability to contract out of the CISG by specifying
that the law of another jurisdiction should apply. To this extent, the
CISG is similar to the domestic contract law of most nations, which allow
parties to specify which law will resolve subsequent disputes. Thus, when the
CISG is applicable, it provides an additional choice to the menu that the
parties can choose from, in addition to the various domestic laws. To date, 63
countries have adopted the CISG. Parties from these countries are involved in
a significant portion of, but by no means all, cross-border transactions.
Despite the fact that the CISG is not universally adopted, it is universally
available. Even countries that have not adopted the CISG can still take advantage
of its provisions. All they have to do is agree that any future disputes will
be resolved via arbitration and provide that the arbitrator shall use the CISG
as the governing law.
The CISG is not the only source that contract drafters can repair to in addition
to domestic law. International commercial transactions not involving
goods will tend to involve services. For example, an American corporation
may contract with an Indian corporation to provide customer support. (The
other major category of contract law – contracts for the sale of real estate – is,
for obvious reasons – governed by local law). These contracts are governed by
the common law in the United States. Much of this common law can be found
in the Restatement of Contracts 2d, which is promulgated by a nongovernmental
organization, the American Law Institute.
Internationally, such contracts are potentially governed by the UNIDROIT
Principles.19 According to the drafters, ‘the objective of the UNIDROIT
International commercial law 283
17 For a history of the drafting of the UCC, see Allen R. Kamp (1998), ‘Uptown
Act: A History of the Uniform Commercial Code: 1940–49’, SMU Law Reivew, 51,
275; Allen R. Kamp (2001), ‘Downtown Code: A History of the Uniform Commercial
Code 1949–54’, Buffalo Law Review, 49, 359. On the recent attempts to update Art. 2,
see Robert E. Scott (2001), ‘Is Article 2 the Best We Can Do?’, Hastings Law Journal,
52, 677.
18 Countries, when adopting the CISG, have the ability to opt out of this second
basis for applying the CISG. See Art. 95. While only a small number of countries have
exercised this option, they include the United States and China (Gillette and Walt,
infra, note 28).
19 For a copy of these principles, their drafting history, and their reception, see
Michael Joachim Bonell (1997), An International Restatement of Contract Law: The
Principles is to establish a neutral and balanced set of rules designed for use
throughout the world irrespective of the legal traditions and the economic and
political conditions of the countries in which they are to be applied’. Much like
the American Restatements of Law, the UNIDROIT Principles are not the
direct product of a government. Rather, UNIDROIT is the International
Institute for the Unification of Private Law. It is an international organization,
originally organized under the League of Nations, which consists of representatives
sent by member countries. The Principles themselves were crafted by
academics from a variety of countries.20 Unlike domestic contract law,
however, the UNIDROIT Principles are not self-executing. They do not apply
to any transaction unless the parties or the adjudicator affirmatively reach out
and select them.
There is one final potential source of contract law. When parties within a
given industry contract with each other, they may agree to have their disputes
adjudicated by rules put forth by a trade association. For example, Bernstein
reports that most international sales of cotton are governed by the rules that the
Liverpool Cotton Association has established.21 The extent to which other
industries have also provided private rules of conduct is an open empirical
question.
We thus have two major efforts – one treaty based and hence binding on all
covered parties, one more of an attempt to spur the development of a new law
merchant – to create international contract law that stands apart from any
domestic law. It is far from obvious that such efforts are welfare enhancing.
These efforts obviously entail a cost. Resources have been spent over the years
producing the CISG and the UNIDROIT Principles. Resources have also been
consumed in encouraging states to adopt the CISG, in informing parties as to
the existence of the two texts and in encouraging parties to adopt the
UNIDROIT Principles as the grounds for decisions. Lawyers have had to
spend time learning the provisions of these new instruments. Indeed, in
American law schools more and more contracts classes include the CISG
within their ambit.
Also, there may be some gravitational pull toward the use of the CISG and
the UNIDROIT Principles. The CISG is the default rule for many transactions;
the UNIDROIT Principles could also achieve such a status. Empirical research
284 Research handbook in international economic law
UNIDROIT Principles of International Commercial Contracts, New York:
Transnational Publishers, 1997.
20 See E. Allan Farnsworth (1997), ‘An International Restatement: The
UNIDROIT Principles of International Commercial Contracts’, University of
Baltimore Law Review, 26, 1, 2.
21 See Lisa Bernstein (2001), ‘Private Commercial Law in the Cotton Industry:
Creating Cooperation through Rules, Norms, and Institutions’, Michigan Law Review,
99, 1724, 1724–5.
suggests that there tends to be some stickiness to default rules. Some parties
may choose the economizing strategy of just sticking with the default
rules.22
Finally, at least in the case of the CISG, there is the cost of confusion. It
may well be the case that parties in two countries that have signed the CISG
have contracted with each other, oblivious of the fact that their subsequent
dispute would be adjudicated under the terms of the CISG. As transaction
costs decrease, one would expect that smaller and smaller companies will
engage in transnational sales with each other. As the size of a transaction
decreases, one would also expect that there would be less investment in legal
advice surrounding the sale. Thus, one would expect the number of parties that
unwittingly end up having their dispute adjudicated under the provisions of the
CISG to increase. Adding choices to the extant menu of legal regimes is not
free.
Of course, one must not overstate the matter. The cost of contracting caps
the cost of any legal rule. Parties that do not wish to bother themselves with
the details of the CISG can easily avoid its application through the adroit use
of choice of law clauses.23 The opportunity costs of the drafters of the CISG
– by and large academics and government officials – may be quite low. The
market may produce standard forms that ensure that even the smallest transactions
are governed by a law that, on an ex ante basis, increases the value of
the transaction.
Still, even if the costs imposed by adding the CISG and the UNIDROIT
Principles are relatively slight, it is far from clear that these costs are
outweighed by compensating benefits. Parties to international commercial
transactions already have a variety of existing domestic laws from which to
select. Under standard conflict of laws principles, parties are free to choose the
law of any jurisdiction that has some relationship to the transaction. Moreover,
there is some trend toward allowing parties to choose any law they see fit,
regardless of whether the transaction at issue touches the state whose law is
selected.24 Such is certainly the case when the parties agree to resolve future
disputes via arbitration. It is thus the case that parties, even absent the CISG
International commercial law 285
22 See Russell Korobkin (1998), ‘The Status Quo Bias and Contract Default
Rules’, Cornell Law Review, 83, 608. See also Clayton and Scott, supra, note 6, at 60
(noting possible stickiness of CISG).
23 If the transaction is entered into with the buyer and the seller sending competing
forms, however, a party may not be able to ensure that it will not find itself subject
to the CISG. As noted, the CISG is the default rule for some transactions, and under
the CISG it is not the case that a party can always ensure that its form, and hence its
choice of law clause, will control.
24 For example, the European Community Convention on the Law Applicable to
Contractual Obligations allows the parties to select ‘any law’ to govern their contract.
and the UNIDROIT Principles, will have a menu of laws to choose from, with
a minimum of two choices and the possibility of many more.
The potential benefit of adding another choice to the menu is even smaller
once one remembers that the contract law of most countries allows parties to
tailor their provisions to suit their own needs. Thus, for a new choice to add
value to contracting parites, it must be the case that it reduces the costs of
tailoring a contract in a significant number of cases. To do this, one of two
things has to be true. First, the new law would add value if it had better default
rules. If there were some reason to believe that the new international efforts
produced terms that were the optimal terms for more parties than were the
terms of the available domestic law, fewer resources would be spent on
contracting out of the defaults.
A second way in which the CISG or the UNIDROIT Principles could
increase social welfare is by making it easier to contract out of the defaults and
into the decision rule that the parties desire. Efficiency increases when parties
have to spend less on ensuring that adjudicators understand that they have
provided for something other than the default rule.
It is an open question as to whether either of these two benefits exists with
respect to the CISG and the UNIDROIT Principles. Indeed, Gillette and Scott
argue vigorously that the CISG does not meet these criteria. As to the
substance of the CISG, Gillette and Scott find it replete with vague standards
that offer no improvement over other law. The reason for this lack of specificity
stems from the process by which the CISG was drafted. It was drafted
by a working committee of academics and government officials from countries
with disparate contracting regimes. Moreover, the drafting committee
worked by consensus. Both the expected and actual result of this process,
according to Gillette and Scott, is that differences among the committee
members would be papered over by vague language rather than resolved
definitively. Moreover, Gillette and Scott conclude that there may be some
difficulty in contracting out of the CISG’s provisions.
The drafting process for the UNIDROIT Principles is similar to that of the
CISG. They were drafted by a working group of academics from different
countries who strove for consensus. It is thus not surprising that the Principles
operate at a high level of abstraction, thus allowing representatives for each
country to view the Principles as consistent with their own legal traditions.
In short, the products produced by the international efforts to date do not
improve the content of the various domestic laws from which contracting parties
can choose. Indeed, it is likely that, over time, the quality of both the CISG and
the UNIDROIT Principles will, to the extent that they are used, decrease.
The domestic contract law of each country has a longer pedigree than do
either the CISG or the UNIDROIT Principles. There have been numerous
cases interpreting their provisions. In short, it has an installed interpretative
286 Research handbook in international economic law
base. Contrast this with the CISG. First, there is not even a single definitive
text; the CISG has official versions in six languages; the UNIDROIT
Principles can be found in even more languages. Second, the case law interpreting
the CISG and the UNIDROIT Principles will be sparse when
compared with domestic law. There are many more domestic transactions than
there are transnational ones. Moreover, few transnational deals are resolved by
either the CISG or the UNIDROIT Principles. It is thus easier for contracting
parties to predict how an adjudicator would apply domestic law as compared
with its international competitors. To the extent that the newness of the CISG
creates uncertainty, the parties may opt for some domestic law and tailor it as
necessary.
Of course, the fact that there is an incentive to select a body of law with a
deep interpretive base does not mean that that law is efficient. The problem is
one of network externalities. The value of the law turns in part on the existing
number of users. While it can be the case that parties gravitate to the most efficient
terms, it can also be true that there is a ‘lock-in’ to a set of rules that is
less than optimal. Yet, as suggested above, neither the CISG nor the
UNIDROIT Principles seem to provide an efficient set of contract doctrine.
Another cost that attends contract law that is set forth in an international
document is that, over the long run, it is unclear whether that law can remain
uniform. To the extent that parties litigate disputes under either the CISG or
the UNIDROIT Principles, these disputes will be heard by a variety of institutions.
Most cases will be decided by arbitration, others by the domestic
courts of various countries. Some arbitration decisions will be published; most
will not be. These disparate decision makers will inevitably speak different
languages and come from different domestic law traditions. They will
undoubtedly reach different results. This is especially true given the high level
of abstraction that both the CISG and the UNIDROIT Principles contain.
Domestic legal systems have mechanisms that are designed to keep interpretive
divergences to a minimum. Each jurisdiction that issues contract law has
a highest body whose rulings are determinative. Moreover, in the case of
Article 2 of the UCC, the Permanent Editorial Board offers commentaries
designed to retain the uniform character of Article 2 across the 50 American
states. There is no such mechanism for either the CISG or the UNIDROIT
Principles. Thus, one would expect that over time there will, in essence, be
multiple versions of these documents.
Defenders of the project of creating international contract law have touted
as a benefit that it would provide a ‘neutral’ law for the parties to agree upon.
This benefit, however, is suspect. The assumption is that the domestic law of
either of the parties would somehow provide an advantage to the home party.
It is difficult to see why this would be the case. To be sure, one may conclude
that a domestic forum would be tilted in favor of its citizens. The decision
International commercial law 287
maker – be it a judge or a jury – may more readily sympathize with the plight
of its fellow citizen. Such concerns, however, can be ameliorated by providing
that any subsequent dispute will be settled by arbitration. Indeed, the arbitration
literature reports that the most important factor as to why parties opt for
arbitration is to ensure that the dispute will be resolved by a neutral third party.
Once the parties have arranged for a neutral decision maker, however, it is
not clear that an international contract law increases the lack of bias. When we
look at the substantive content of contract law, it is difficult to see how domestic
law can be systematically skewed to favor citizens over foreigners.
Commercial transactions by and large consist of a buyer and seller. Even if
one could draft contract law that favored one group over another – and given
the ability to contract out of most default rules it is far from clear that such an
attempt would be effective – a country faces two problems. First, the primary
consumers of its law are going to be its domestic citizens. It is unclear why
these groups would endorse a law that attempted to favor buyers over sellers
or sellers over buyers. This is especially true if the law is limited in its scope
to businesses – which both buy and sell – with consumer protection handled
elsewhere.
Second, it is unclear that a country could identify, ex ante, whether in international
commercial transactions its businesses are more likely to be buyers or
sellers. Given that it is thus difficult if not impossible to systematically favor
domestic interests via contract law, it is unlikely that commercial parties will
have a preference for contract law that purports to be international over
domestic contract law.
The economic case for the trend toward international contract law is thus
uneasy at best. The mere existence of these efforts, however, is not evidence
of their efficiency. One can easily posit reasons as to why the CISG and
UNIDROIT Principles may exist even if they do not promote efficiency.
Those involved in creating these instruments may get rents from their efforts.
Government officials and academics may well enjoy being part of an international
working group. Moreover, to the extent that one wants to be an arbitrator
in future cases, something over which there is substantial competition,
being part of a drafting effort may burnish one’s reputation.
The empirical data we have suggest that, in fact, parties do not view either
the CISG or the UNIDROIT Principles as superior to domestic law. Drahozal
provides data for 2280 cases that went to arbitration under the auspices of the
ICC between 2001 and 2003.25 Of these, seven provided for application of the
CISG, one directed the arbitrator to the UNIDROIT Principles, and a small
number of others invoked general principles of international contract law. In
288 Research handbook in international economic law
25 Drahozal, supra, note 8, at 537–40.
toto, less than 2 per cent of the contracts called for the application of nondomestic
law. More than three-fourths specified a particular domestic law to be
applied, and the rest, roughly 20 per cent, did not specify which law should
govern the dispute. Of 15 joint venture contracts that Drahozal located in a
different database that provided for arbitration, four mandated the application
of international legal practices.26
While the data gathered so far are suggestive, they are by no means conclusive.
Still, if additional work confirms the patterns found by Drahozal, it
would be strong evidence that the parties have yet to conclude that the CISG
and the UNIDROIT Principles offer a value-enhancing alternative to the
domestic laws from which they could select.
While the available data offer some indication that parties do not have a
taste for international commercial law, they do not provide any insight into
which domestic law parties tend to adopt. One can imagine a number of possibilities.
The parties may tend to select the law of the home country of one of
the parties. In selecting between the two, there may be a rough ordering among
countries. For example, it may be the case that when one party is from
England, English law is always selected.
A second possibility would be that the parties tend to eschew the law from
the country of either of them. In other words, they may tend to select the law
of a third country. Again, there may be patterns as to which country’s law
parties tend to select.
A third distinct pattern would be that parties would simply select what they
view as the best law, regardless of whether any party to the transaction hales
from that country. Perhaps New York supplies the best contract law, and most
contracts embrace it.
A final pattern would be one where parties select a country’s law based on
the type of transaction involved. For example, parties involved in a sale of
goods could gravitate toward one country’s law, while parties to contracts that
are not sales of goods gravitate toward another country’s law.
A related open question is whether, as cross-border transactions increase,
jurisdictions will engage in competition in order to attract users of both their
forums and their laws. Competition here could take one of two forms. The first
would be to create a reputation for treating all parties equally. As mentioned
above, roughly 90 per cent of transnational commercial contracts call for arbitration,
and the main reason for this selection is the desire to avoid a biased
International commercial law 289
26 See id. at 540–41. All four contracts were between American and Chinese
businesses, and they only called for application of general international principles if the
law of China was silent on the matter in question. Otherwise, the law of China was to
control. See id. at 541.
forum. A state that created a reputation for courts that were scrupulously evenhanded
might be able to capture some of this business.
Jurisdictions could also compete over the quality of their contract law. In
terms of promoting better forums and better law, the interest that would benefit
the most, and hence have an incentive to lobby for such actions, would be
the local lawyers. In terms of a demand for better law, perhaps the more a
jurisdiction’s law becomes used, the more work there is for its lawyers in
consulting on the drafting of contracts. If so, these lawyers would have an
incentive to lobby for laws that would be more favorable to contracting
parties.
To be sure, there may not be much room for competition on this dimension.
The contracting parties always have an easy way out. They can simply provide
the terms they want in the contract. Rather than scouring the world for the best
set of default rules, it may be cheaper for a business to draft a contract that
provides the set of terms that will optimize the transaction rather than selecting
among the various alternatives provided by the respective states. All it
needs to do is to find a jurisdiction that allows it sufficient freedom in crafting
contract terms. Once a party identifies such a jurisdiction, it may be the case
that it will not monitor the changes in the law of other jurisdictions. The costs
of search may outweigh any benefits that the party would capture from a better
set of default rules. It is far from clear that, at the margin, investing in better
legislation would be a profitable strategy for either business groups or business
lawyers.
On the other hand, it may make sense for some states to invest in providing
a better forum to resolve disputes. Whereas parties are by and large free to
tailor contracts to meet their needs, they cannot alter the expertise and speed
of the various forums in which any subsequent disputes will be adjudicated.
Arbitration, while having its benefits, also has its costs. Moreover, local
lawyers benefit from having an attractive forum. When a dispute arises,
regardless of where the parties are located, they will more than likely engage
local counsel. Such counsel can provide insight into the operation of the
chosen forum, and they can serve as a conduit for transmitting documents and
materials to the court. They thus have an incentive to increase the attractiveness
of their forums. The same is true for judges. To the extent that they have
a taste for international commercial disputes, they have an incentive to create
a hospitable venue.27
Of course, one cannot relentlessly divorce forum and law. While one can
290 Research handbook in international economic law
27 For an example of this dynamic in the domestic context, see Robert K.
Rasmussen and Randall S. Thomas (2000), ‘Timing Matters: Promoting Forum
Shopping by Insolvent Corporations’, Northwestern Law Review, 94, 1357.
find an arbitrator to apply any given law, if lawyers want their forum to be
selected, they will have some incentive to ensure that the substantive law is
attractive to the parties. One would not select a New York court to resolve a
dispute, but then instruct that court to apply Japanese law.
Thus, it may be the case that we will see in the future competition among
jurisdictions. We in fact do see some movement in this direction. New York
has enacted legislation that offers its courts and its laws to all parties, regardless
of whether the deal has any connection with that state.28
Given the federal nature of the United States, this could be an attempt to
garner use by wholly American parties residing outside of New York, or it
could be an effort to become a center for resolving international commercial
disputes. No research to date has reported as to whether this effort has
garnered additional business for New York courts and lawyers.
Of course, even if some jurisdictions endeavored to make their forums
more attractive to foreign parties, one would not expect the arbitration associations
and the arbitrators to stand still. They get the lion’s share of the dispute
resolution business, and will, no doubt, take necessary steps to safe-guard their
prerogatives. Indeed, if states view the arbitrators as more nimble in any
competition than they are, if they decide that there is a lock-in effect, or if
there simply is not enough money on the table, they may not get into the
competition in the first instance.
Before looking at a few of the notable substantive divergences between
American contract law and its international brethren, one should first pause
to note the similarities. The cost of any legal rule is capped by the cost of
contracting around it. By and large, all of the contenders – the domestic
laws of most countries (including the United States), the CISG, the
UNIDROIT Principles – embrace the tenet of party autonomy.29 Choice of
law and choice of forum clauses are almost universally respected. To the
extent that no governing law provides the appropriate set of default rules,
the parties can select the law of a jurisdiction that provides for easy optingout.
In other words, while there are differences between the various laws
that may apply to an international commercial contract, one should be careful
not to overstate either the magnitude or the importance of these differences.
A detailed comparison of Article 2 of the UCC and the CISG can be found
International commercial law 291
28 See NY General Obligation Laws § 5–1401 (2001).
29 See, for example, UNIDROIT Art 1.1 (‘The parties are free to enter into a
contract and to determine its content.’); Art 1.5 (‘The parties may exclude the application
of these Principles or derogate from or vary the effect of any of their provisions,
except as otherwise provided in the Principles’).
in Gillette and Walt.30 By and large, the UNIDROIT Principles follow the lead
of the CISG.31 Some of the more important differences include the following.
Article 2 resolves the so-called ‘battle of the forms’ problem (the buyer and
the seller each send a form that agrees on the basic terms but differ on other
terms that the parties have not expressly bargained over) by having conflicting
terms cancel out and applying the UCC terms that cover the issue in question.
32 Under the CISG, however, timing matters. If the second form contains
terms that differ from the first, and the parties perform the deal, the terms of
the second form control. This is basically the ‘last shot’ rule that applied at
American common law prior to the adoption of Article 2. The UNIDROIT
Principles follow the CISG on this score.33
This difference presents an opportunity to provide some fresh evidence on
the battle of the forms debate. Keating argues that his research shows that
many companies contracting under Article 2 often structure their arrangements
so as to avoid the problem of battling forms.34 Baird and Weisberg
argue that parties would prefer the last-shot rule.35 If one could locate sufficient
companies that are subject to the UCC in its domestic contracts and the
CISG in its international contracts, it may be possible to ascertain whether the
company acts differently based on which set of rules applies. For example, if
a party structures its transactions to avoid the battle of the forms problem in
its domestic transactions, but is willing to live with the CISG’s handling of
conflicting forms, this would be some evidence that the CISG’s approach is
the more efficient of the two.
Another area of divergence between Article 2 and the CISG is the parole
evidence rule. The parole evidence rule delineates what evidence can be introduced
at trial to establish the terms of a contract. At common law, if the
contract was complete on its face, no supplemental terms could be added.
292 Research handbook in international economic law
30 See Clayton P. Gillette and Steven D. Walt (1999), Sales Law: Domestic and
International, New York: Foundation Press 1999.
31 Joseph M. Perillo (1994), ‘UNIDROIT Principles of International
Commercial Contracts: The Black Letter Text and a Review’, Fordham Law Review,
43, 281.
32 The literature on this provision is voluminous. For an introduction to this literature
and a description of how businesses handle this problem in practice, see Daniel
Keating (2000), ‘Exploring the Battle of the Forms in Action’, Michigan Law Review,
98, 2678.
33 See Art. 2.11
34 See Keating, supra, note 32, at 2696–7 (reporting that half of the businesses
in his sample have adopted contracting practices designed to avoid the battle-of-theforms
problem).
35 See Douglas G. Baird and Robert Weisberg (1982), ‘Rules, Standards, and the
Battle of the Forms: A Reassessment of § 2-207’, Virginia Law Review, 68, 1217.
Article 2 contains a parole evidence rule that is less strict than the traditional
common law rule.36 For cases litigated under the UCC, the parties can always
introduce course of dealing, trade usage or course of performance and, unless
the written contract so forbids, evidence of additional terms that do not contradict
those in the writing.37 While the interpretation of the CISG on this matter
is open to debate, most read the treaty as being even more expansive than
Article 2. Under this reading, there is no limit on the evidence that can be
introduced to aid the decision maker in ascertaining the terms of the deal.
The parole evidence rule is notable in that it is one substantive area of
contract law where one can find economic arguments that the rule in international
transactions should be different than the one that applies to domestic
transactions. Domestic scholars have argued over whether, from an ex ante
perspective, the UCC’s blessing of the use of custom when interpreting
contracts is efficient, with much of the economically inspired work arguing
against the widespread use of custom as an interpretative tool.38
Both Clayton Gillette and Avery Katz have argued that there are additional
reasons to allow the introduction of custom when interpreting transnational
contracts as opposed to purely domestic ones. Gillette endorses the CISG’s use
of custom on the grounds that courts have been restrained in that they only find
customs in two situations, both of which have low probability for error. The
first is when the custom at issue is promulgated and publicized by an international
trade organization. Such an observable and verifiable source makes it
unlikely that the adjudicator would erroneously find a custom where none
exists. The second is predicated on customs that are easy to verify whether or
not they have been complied with. For Gillette, this selective use of custom
makes it more likely that the adjudicator will invoke custom in a way that
reduces the parties’ contracting costs.
Katz, while agreeing with Gillette that dispute resolution under the CISG is
right to invoke custom, points to four other factors: the ability of parties to
select the applicable law and choice of forum in international transactions (so
International commercial law 293
36 See Schwartz and Scott, supra, note 5.
37 UCC 2-202.
38 See Charles J. Goetz and Robert E. Scott (1985), ‘The Limits of Expanded
Choice: An Analysis of the Interactions between Express and Implied Contract Terms’,
California Law Review, 73, 261; Jody S. Kraus and Steven D. Walt (2000), ‘In Defense
of the Incorporation Strategy’, in Kraus and Walt, supra, note 13; Lisa Bernstein
(1999), ‘The Questionable Empirical Basis of Article 2’s Incorporation Strategy: A
Preliminary Study’, University of Chicago Law Review, 66, 710; Richard A. Epstein
(1999), ‘Confusion about Custom: Disentangling Informal Custom from Standard
Contractual Provisions’, University of Chicago Law Review, 66, 821; Robert E. Scott
(2000), ‘The Case for Formalism in Relational Contract’, Northwest University Law
Review, 94, 847.
that parties that do not want to be stuck with one regime can easily contract
for another), the ability to select procedural regimes that are less costly than
the domestic US regime (parties that desire the use of custom can select
regimes that are more adept at discerning them than are general US courts), the
extensive use of letters of credit as the payment mechanism in international
transactions (it provides an alternate enforcement mechanism which is highly
formalistic in nature), and the fact that international litigation has a higher
fixed cost than does domestic litigation (which makes it more likely that
parties will spend resources on the marginal cost of proving the nature of the
governing trade usage). In sum, the benefit that Katz finds with the CISG is
that it provides the contracting parties with the option to opt into a legal regime
that has a parole evidence rule that may fit the needs of some cross-border
transactions.
The extent to which remedies upon breach differ between American law on
the one hand and the CISG on the other is another area that warrants brief
mention. The debate in the law and economics literature over whether specific
performance should be routinely available has been quite robust.39 The CISG,
at least on first reading, broadly embraces specific performance. There is,
however, a twist. Article 28 provides that ‘a court is not bound to enter a judgment
for specific performance unless the court would do so under its own law
in respect of similar contracts of sale not governed by this Convention’. While
the conventional wisdom is that specific performance is not routinely available
under the UCC, Gillette and Walt argue that in looking for ‘similar’ contracts,
one has to take into account the often geographic distance between the parties
in the international context. They assert that such distance in a domestic
setting could well lead a court to order specific performance.40 It remains to
be seen whether or not courts will follow this interpretation.
2.2. Payment mechanisms
Ensuring the transfer of money from buyer to seller has been a distinctive part
of international commercial transactions for centuries. Letters of credit,
commonly used in international sales of goods transactions, trace their origins
back to medieval Europe.41 In situations where legal remedies against a
breaching party are either uncertain or prohibitively expensive, the payment
294 Research handbook in international economic law
39 For an introduction to the literature, see Thomas S. Ulen (1998), ‘Specific
Performance’, in Peter Newman (ed), The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics and
The Law, Stockton Press, 481.
40 See Gillette and Walt, supra note 30, at 338–42.
41 For a brief history, see Boris Kozolchyk (1965), ‘The Legal Nature of the
Irrevocable Commercial Letter of Credit’, American Journal of Comparative Law, 14,
395, 395–400.
mechanism can provide sufficient assurances to both parties to induce them to
enter into the trade.
There are basically four ways parties can structure the payment aspect of a
transaction. At one extreme is prepayment, where the buyer pays the seller
before the seller begins its performance. At the other extreme is shipping on
open account. Here, the seller completes its performance before the buyer
sends payment. In these two types of payment structure, one side is protected
against opportunism – it is assured of the other side’s performance before it
has to begin its own – but the other side exposes itself to such risks – it has
tendered its obligations and needs to await performance by the other side. To
the extent that performance is not forthcoming, the disappointed party is left
with the unappealing remedy of bringing suit against the foreign party, often
in a foreign jurisdiction.42
Two other types of payment structure, both commonly employed in crossborder
contracts, lessen the asymmetry of the risk of opportunism. These are the
collection transaction and the letter of credit transaction. In a collection transaction,
the seller ships the goods prior to payment, but does not grant the buyer
unfettered access to the goods. Rather, the seller at the time of shipment procures
a bill of lading or a similar type of document. The bill of lading embodies the
right to the goods. The seller then prepares a draft drawn on the buyer. The draft
and the bill of lading are then sent through banking channels to the buyer. The
buyer must pay the draft in order to procure the bill of lading.43
The buyer is thus assured that it will receive the goods. This reduces the
risk that the buyer faces, but does not eliminate it. The buyer will receive the
goods that the seller shipped, but the goods themselves may not be up to snuff.
To the extent that the goods are not what the seller promised, the buyer has to
seek recourse against the seller.
The collection transaction also reduces the risk to the seller. It ensures that
the buyer has to tender its performance in order to obtain the goods. To be
sure, the seller retains the risk that the buyer will decide to back out of the
transaction.44 The magnitude of this risk, however, turns on the nature of the
International commercial law 295
42 Mann reports that one banker whom he interviewed offered two sets of figures
regarding the use of various payment mechanisms. One data set indicated that 72 per
cent of transactions are down on open account, and 2 per cent by prepayment; a second
put the figures at 52 per cent and 12 per cent respectively. See Ronald J. Mann (2000),
‘The Role of Letters of Credit in Payment Transactions’, Michigan Law Review, 98,
2494, 2518 note 78 .
43 Mann reports that although a standardized text for enforcing documentary
drafts has yet to emerge, all major trading countries enforce the basic mechanics of this
transaction. See Mann, supra note 42, at 454.
44 In a sample of 100 collection transactions, Mann reports a failure-to-pay rate
of 12 per cent. See id. at 2518 note 75.
market for the goods in question. To the extent that the goods end up in a
market where they can be resold quickly, the cost to the seller of the buyer’s
failure to pay is reduced. The seller’s loss is limited to the difference between
what the buyer promised to pay and what the goods are actually sold for, net
of the costs of arranging the sale.
Letters of credit offer additional protections to the seller, without increasing
the risk to the buyer. The basic structure of the letter of credit transaction
is that the buyer procures a letter of credit from its bank in favor of the seller.
The credit is an undertaking of the bank to pay the seller when the seller has
met the conditions set forth in the letter. In a typical sales transaction, the letter
may allow the seller to draw upon the credit when the seller presents a bill of
lading that reflects the shipment of the specified goods. Since the seller can
only procure the bill of lading by shipping the goods, the seller does not
receive the benefit of the buyer’s performance until it has performed. To this
extent, the letter of credit is similar to the collection transaction. Yet there is
more. Because the buyer’s bank has issued the letter – and presumably made
arrangements to ensure that it will be able to recover from her – the seller
knows that once he procures the required documents, he can receive
payment.45 The seller thus does not risk the buyer deciding to not go through
with the transaction after the goods have been shipped.
To be sure, the seller may not have easy access to the buyer’s bank. In this
situation, the buyer’s bank will enlist the aid of the seller’s bank. The buyer’s
bank will transmit the letter to the seller’s bank, and the seller can present the
documents at his bank.
The standard economic explanation for the letter of credit is that it assures
the seller of payment. The seller knows that if it produces the documents
required by the letter of credit, it will be paid. Once the seller ships the goods,
it will not be beholden to the good will of the buyer.46 Recent empirical work,
however, has questioned this conventional account. In particular, it has
focused on the assurances of payment that sellers have once they send the
goods. The traditional account rests on the ability of sellers to submit documents
that provide them with an iron-clad right to payment. It implies that sellers,
in order to prevent buyer opportunism, routinely present documents that
strictly comply with the terms of the letter of credit.
296 Research handbook in international economic law
45 On the way in which letters of credit provide bilateral assurances, see Avery
Wiener Katz (2000), ‘Informality as a Bilateral Assurance Mechanism’, Michigan Law
Review, 98, 2554. On the high rate of providing documents that do not comply strictly with
the requirements of the credit and the argument that the procurement of the credit provides
information to the seller about the quality of the buyer, see Mann, supra, note 42.
46 See Mann, supra note 42, at 215–24; Clayton P. Gillette et al., (1996),
‘Payment Systems and Credit Instruments’, 560–61.
However, in fact, sellers drawing on letters of credit often submit documents
that do not comply with the credit terms. When a bank receives a draw on a letter
of credit that does not strictly comply with the letter’s terms, it asks the applicant
– the buyer – whether it will waive the defects. In practice, buyers routinely
consent to the bank paying on the letter of credit. In looking at 500 letter-ofcredit
transactions, Mann finds a compliance rate of only 27 per cent.47
Responding to these empirical results, Mann offers an alternative explanation
as to how letters of credit reduce the performance risks inherent in a crossborder
sale of goods. He argues that the bank’s decision to issue a letter of
credit is itself a verification that the buyer will pay for the goods. Banks do not
want to develop a reputation for not honoring letters of credit. Hence, they will
tend to issue letters of credit to buyers whom they believe will not attempt to
opportunistically fail to waive discrepancies.48 In addition, in some settings,
the letter of credit verifies the fact that there is a legitimate transaction.
Katz, while agreeing that the traditional account cannot be squared with the
level of non-conforming documents that Mann observes, offers a different
explanation.49 Katz begins with the bilateral nature of the risks involved in the
cross-border commercial transaction. The seller is worried about the buyer’s
willingness to pay and the buyer is worried about the seller’s willingness to
ship. Both parties have observable but not verifiable information that the other
is likely to perform, though neither relishes the prospect of tracking down the
other in a foreign jurisdiction should the need arise. When the seller prepares
documents, even ones that do not strictly comply with the terms of the credit,
this is observable and verifiable information that the seller has in fact
performed its side of the bargain. The issuing bank in this situation makes sure
that the buyer does not opportunistically insist that the bank dishonor the
letter. Whereas Mann posits that the informational role of the letter takes place
when the bank decides to issue the letter, for Katz the key role of the bank is
monitoring its customer after the seller has attempted to draw on the letter.
Indeed, the stories are compatible in that both trade-off on the ability of the
issuing bank to monitor and police its customer. They only differ on whether
the bank performs this function when the letter of credit is issued or after the
seller has attempted to draw on it.
International commercial law 297
47 See Mann, supra, note 42, at 2502.
48 Gillette questions Mann’s account. He argues that letters of credit would serve
as poor signals of the quality of the buyer, and that sellers would have no mechanism
to discipline banks that allow their customers to stand on technicalities in order to
prevent payment on a letter of credit. See Clayton P. Gillette (2000), ‘Letters of Credit
as Signals’, Michigan Law Review, 98, 2537.
49 Avery Wiener Katz (2000), ‘Informality as a Bilateral Assurance
Mechanism’, Michigan Law Review, 98, 2554.
The law governing letters of credit is essentially private in origin. The
International Chamber of Commerce has put forth the Uniform Customs and
Practice for Documentary Credits. Article 5 of the UCC also governs letters of
credit.50 The most recent revision of Article 5 was undertaken with the express
purpose of bringing American law into alignment with the UCP. Also, New
York law expressly makes the UCC inapplicable when the letter is governed
by the UCP.
As with the CISG and the UNIDROIT Principles, one area for future
research would be the political economy of the ICC. The success of the ICC
in the letter of credit area is extraordinary. No other international commercial
law has been so widely adopted. What explains the success of the UCP?
One attribute that may explain the success is the composition of the ICC.
Unlike UNCITRAL and UNIDROIT, it is not staffed with members selected
by national governments. Rather, it is manned by executives of the businesses
that comprise the membership of the ICC. As an initial matter, one would
expect that those involved in ICC drafting projects will have more familiarity
with actual commercial practices than would those who labor on the UNCITRAL
and UNIDROIT projects.
The widespread adoption of the UCP may also relate to the nature of the
letter of credit transaction. Large, money-center banks, a well-defined interest
group capable of coordinated action, charge for their services in issuing letters
of credit.51 To minimize their costs, they may insist on playing by a single set
of rules. Moreover, they may be able to capture the ICC drafting process.52 On
this story, they would use the ICC to promulgate rules that favor their interests,
and then insist that the letters that they issue be governed by those rules.
Of course, even if banks dominate the process, it is far from clear that the
rules that they draft could systematically transfer wealth to them from their
clients. To be sure, the UCP limits the liability of banks and sets clear bound-
298 Research handbook in international economic law
50 On the most recent redrafting of Art. 5, see James J. White (1995), ‘The
Impact of Internationalization of Transnational Commercial Law: The Influence of
International Practice on the Revision of Article 5 of the UCC’, Northwestern Journal
of International Law and Business, 189, 190. (‘The UCP had an enormous influence on
the revision of Article 5. Nothing else . . . had anything like the influence the UCP had.
In fact, the UCP may have had a greater influence on the redraft of Article 5 than existing
Article 5 of the UCC’.)
51 Mann reports that the typical fee for a letter of credit transaction is 0.25 per
cent of the amount of the letter. Mann, supra, note 42, at 2499.
52 See Stephan, supra note 6, at 781. While Stephan asserts that banks dominate
the ICC drafting process, he offers no theory as to how they are able to do so. The ICC,
after all, is composed primarily of business interests. If the rules of the banks impose
costs on the companies that use letters of credit, one would think that there would be
some effort to place business representatives on the ICC drafting committee.
aries on their obligations.53 Yet the law is not the only mechanism that polices
bank behavior. Anecdotal evidence suggests that reputation plays a large role
in the letter of credit market. Banks cultivate a reputation of honoring the
letters of credit that they issue.54 To the extent that the need to maintain a reputation
provides adequate incentives for banks to fulfill the role that they play
in letter of credit transactions, one would not expect there to be extensive legal
liability as well.
2.3. Secured transactions
Credit is an essential element in all commercial transactions. At times, credit
will be sought in order to purchase specific goods; at other times, a debtor may
borrow money to assist it in its general obligations. Regardless of the reason
for the debtor’s desire for credit, it will often be the case that the borrower will
pledge collateral to back up the loan. The loan itself is memorialized in a
contract, which is interpreted under the applicable contract law. The subject of
this subheading is the law that regulates the lender’s ability to ensure that it
has priority to the collateral that the debtor has pledged.
At the outset, it is important to note that choice of law clauses play no role
when it comes to the granting of collateral. The essential element of modern
asset-pledging systems is a recordation system. Third parties can quickly
ascertain where they should look to ascertain whether the debtor has already
granted someone a priority interest in its assets. It is thus clear that there needs
to be a mandatory law specifying which jurisdiction’s law will cover the
pledge of the collateral.
To the extent that the borrower pledges real estate to stand behind its
repayment obligation, that pledge will be governed by local law. To be sure,
while one could imagine a uniform solution, local lawyers have reasons not
to see it happen. They get rents from ensuring that they have to be consulted
on any transfer involving real estate. Moreover, it is far from clear that there
would be significant gains should real estate law be harmonized across countries.
As to personal property, historically countries differed significantly in
terms of both whether they had a functioning law of secured credit and, for
those that did, how those systems operated. Recently, there have been attempts
to bring some degree of harmonization to the law of secured credit. Part of the
movement is simply to increase the number of countries that have a system of
secured credit. UNCITRAL is currently in the process of drafting a legislative
guide for states that wish to institute a system of secured credit. The World
International commercial law 299
53 See Stephan, supra note 6, at 780–83.
54 See Mann, supra note 42, at 2502 note 32.
Bank, as part of its Doing Business Project, monitors the extent to which countries
have enacted functioning secured credit regimes.
The efficiency of secured credit in the United States has been hotly debated
for years.55 The debate has centered on the extent to which the granting of
priority to a secured credit can lower a debtor’s overall cost of capital.
Proponents of secured credit note that it can ensure that a single lender takes
responsibility for monitoring the actions of the debtor and that it limits the
debtor’s ability to engage in asset substitution. Opponents, in contrast, worry
that secured credit can induce the debtor to undertake projects that have a
negative net present value.
The case for secured credit in some countries may be stronger than the case
for secured credit in the United States. In the United States, secured credit only
provides modest procedural advantages to the secured creditor that wants to
foreclose on its collateral. Each state provides a relatively simple system by
which an unsecured creditor who is not paid can get the state to sell the
debtor’s property to satisfy the debt. For this reason, the literature examining
American secured credit law centers on the benefits that may accrue by
providing the debtor with the ability to give a creditor a priority right in certain
assets in advance of default.
To the extent, however, that a country does not have a legal system that
allows for the easy enforcement of unsecured debt, a system of secured debt
that carried with it credible enforcement mechanisms could well increase a
debtor’s access to capital. In such a situation, the crucial attribute is not so
much priority as it is ensuring the creditor that it can in fact reach the debtor’s
assets should the debtor default on its repayment obligation.
In addition to the efforts to increase the number of countries with a functioning
law of secured credit, there are the attempts to coordinate the various
existing national secured credit systems. The main problem here is with collateral
that, by its nature, moves from one country to another. Registry systems
tend to be national or even local in terms of coverage. Goods that move
between multiple jurisdictions create the risk of conflicting security interests
in the same goods. To the extent that one concludes that secured credit
provides efficiency gains, national systems should be coordinated so as to
minimize the total cost of secured creditors maintaining their secured interests
as goods move across national boundaries and the costs of third parties in the
new country discovering the interest of the secured creditor.
To address this problem, UNIDROIT has created a convention on mobile
300 Research handbook in international economic law
55 See Barry E. Adler (1998), ‘Secured Credit Contracts’, in Peter Newman (ed),
The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics and the Law, vol. 3, Stockton Press, 405.
goods.56 The convention contains a protocol on the handling of security
interests in airlines, and efforts are under way to draft protocols covering
other types of mobile collateral. A number of states have signed the convention
and the protocol. Neither, however, is yet in force. The convention has
received sufficient ratifications to enter into force, but only to the extent
that a protocol is in force. As to the only existing protocol, the United States
has ratified it, but it currently falls three ratifications short of coming into
force.
Along the same lines, but to date even less successful, UNCITRAL has sent
out to its member states a convention on receivables. The proponents of the
convention assert that its adoption would facilitate securitization transactions.
This convention has yet to garner sufficient adoptions to enter into force. The
United States has signed, but not ratified, the convention.
It will be interesting to see whether these efforts to provide uniformity in
the law of secured credit ultimately enjoy the success of the UCP. In the letter
of credit context, large banks have been able to press successfully for a
uniform standard that applies across jurisdictions. Large banks and similar
providers of capital are involved both in financing arrangements involving
airplanes and in securitization transactions. Whether they have similar incentives
to press for an international law on these topics, and, to the extent that
they do have such incentives, whether they have the clout to influence the
drafting of the proposed laws and then to engineer the adoption of these
proposals remains unclear.
2.4. Bankruptcy law
The problems that arise when a business has assets in more than one jurisdiction
have occupied the attention of legal scholars for over 100 years.57 It used
to be the case that foreign creditors had difficulty establishing their claims in
the bankruptcy court of another country. Such a lowering of priority would
make an international commercial transaction more expensive than an identical
domestic one. A foreign party would realize that, at the time of the transaction,
it faced a greater loss upon insolvency than would a similarly situated
domestic party. Thus, this would, at the margin, give a competitive advantage
to the domestic party. Indeed, such a system could, in some settings, encourage
domestic lenders to invest in projects that have a negative expected rate of
International commercial law 301
56 See Roy Goode (2003), ‘The Cape Town Convention on International
Interests in Mobile Equipment: A Driving Force for International Asset-Based
Financing’, UCC Law Journal, 36, 1.
57 See John Lowell (1888), ‘Conflict of Laws as Applied to Assignments of
Creditors’, Harvard Law Review, 1, 259.
return.58 Most countries today, however, provide for equal treatment of
foreign and domestic creditors. To the extent that they do not, there is no
economic justification for such treatment.
The larger extant problem is administering the assets of the business. Most
large businesses today are corporate groups. The assets in one country will
reside in a different legal entity from the assets of the same enterprise that are
located in other nations. For some businesses, this may not present much of a
cost upon insolvency. To the extent that the assets in each individual country
have little synergy with assets in other countries, countries could follow the
traditional practice of administering the assets within their borders – the ‘territorial
approach’ – without much loss of efficiency.59
Yet it is undoubtedly true that for some corporate groups, despite the fact
that the assets rest in distinct legal entities, it may be the case that the
combined value of the business is worth more if the assets are administered
together.60 Indeed, recent trends suggest that more and more enterprises fall
into this category. The challenge thus becomes one of cooperation between
two or more sovereigns. One problem is that countries may differ on the goals
that bankruptcy law seeks to implement. Some countries may have a law that
puts an emphasis on ensuring that the assets are put to their highest valued use;
other countries may place a premium on keeping the business operating and
the employees employed.
Even if two countries have insolvency regimes that seek to maximize the
same goal, it may be that they differ in the way they implement this policy. For
example, most countries have laws that allow the bankruptcy estate to recover
certain payments before bankruptcy on the theory that they were ‘preferences’.
What constitutes a preference, however, differs from country to country.
When systems are not coordinated, there is a higher probability that corporate
entities in each country will be administered separately rather than administered
as a unit. Administering assets separately creates a push towards
liquidation. To the extent that liquidation fails to put assets to their highest
valued use, this in turn will raise the cost of credit.61
302 Research handbook in international economic law
58 See Lucian Arye Bebchuk and Andrew Guzman (1999), ‘An Economic
Analysis of Transnational Bankruptcies’, Journal of Law and Economics, 42, 775.
59 See Robert K. Rasmussen (1997), ‘A New Approach to Transnational
Insolvencies’, Michigan Journal of International Law, 19, 1.
60 Of course, administering the assets together does not necessarily entail a reorganization
of the enterprise. A sale of the enterprise as a going concern is a viable, and
often used, alternative. See Douglas G. Baird and Robert K. Rasmussen (2002), ‘The
End of Bankruptcy’, Stanford Law Review, 55, 715, 777–8; Douglas G. Baird and
Robert K. Rasmussen (2003), ‘Chapter 11 at Twilight’, Stanford Law Review, 56, 673.
61 See Bebchuk and Guzman, supra, note 58.
The Maxwell bankruptcy illustrates the potential to be gained from cooperation.
The assets of the business were in one country – the United States – and
the management was primarily located in a second country – England. There
exists no formal mechanism to coordinate insolvency proceedings between the
two countries. The parties, however, drafted a protocol designed to coordinate
the two proceedings. That the parties were willing to incur the cost of negotiating
this deal suggests that they viewed coordination as having positive benefits.
The standard response to this situation has been to call for a ‘universalist’
system under which one bankruptcy court takes the lead and the others defer
to the major decisions made by that court. The court that is to have primary
authority is the court located in the business’s ‘home country’, which is
defined as the principal place of business. Such an approach can lower a business’s
cost of credit as opposed to the territorial approach.62 Even so-called
‘non adjusting creditors’, those creditors who would not change their behavior
based on a change in legal regimes, can be made better off by a universalist
system as compared with a territorial one.63
Proponents of universalism recognize that their approach should be implemented
via a treaty among nations. Historically, treaties on insolvency matters
have been rare. The notable exception has been the treaty among the
Scandinavian countries, which has been in force since 1933. In 2002, the
European Union established its own method for coordinating bankruptcy
proceedings among the member states. UNCITRAL has produced a model law
on the subject, which the United States adopted as part of its Bankruptcy Code
in 2005. It remains to be seen the extent to which the American adoption will
stir other nations to similar action.
As with other areas of international commercial law, the political economy
of the production of international insolvency law remains under-explored. As
to the substance of the model law that UNCITRAL has put forward, it should
come as no surprise that it contains few clear rules. The process of drafting
the insolvency text mirrors that that produced the CISG. The hallmark of the
Model Law is that it provides a list of actions that a court ‘may’ take once it
recognizes the existence of an insolvency proceeding in another country. The
list of what a court is required to do, in contrast, is modest at best. By its own
terms, the Model Law sets up a framework for cooperation, if the courts
decide in fact to cooperate. Thus, even if the Model Law were adopted by all
International commercial law 303
62 The best economic defense of universalism is Andrew T. Guzman (2000),
‘International Bankruptcy: In Defense of Universalism’, Michigan Law Reviews, 98,
2177.
63 See id. at 2187–204.
countries, it is far from clear that the universalist vision will have become a
reality.
Universalism and territorialism do not exhaust the possible responses to the
plight of an insolvent transnational enterprise. Another alternative is to allow
the business to contract for how its financial distress would be handled.64 It
can remain with the current default standard, that of territoriality, or it can
include in its contracts choice of forum clauses. These clauses would select the
jurisdiction that would take the lead in sorting out the debtor’s financial
distress. The theory is that, to lower its cost of capital, the business would have
an incentive to select the jurisdiction that provided the most efficient bankruptcy
system.
Much remains to be explored in the area of transnational insolvencies. In
addition to the general problem of inducing cooperation when such cooperation
is efficient, there is the problem of competing goals, and there is the problem
of integrating details such as which pre-bankruptcy transactions can be
unwound in bankruptcy.65
3. Conclusion
International commerce is growing, and international commercial law is
expanding as well. The increase in commerce can be explained by falling trade
barriers, decreasing transactions costs, and growing economies worldwide.
Few economists decry any of these trends. The increase in law may well be
another matter. Some development may promote efficiency. Contract terms
set by organizations to handle cross-border sales may be an efficient response
to the shortcomings of the public legal system. Some areas of commercial law,
perhaps letter of credit rules and the financing of mobile collateral, may be
worldwide in scope and operate best under a single set of rules. Economic
analysis of the legal rules in this area may reveal that these rules increase
social welfare.
Yet one can be skeptical. Much of the new law comes from international
organizations whose workings have yet to be subject to sustained analysis.
Uniformity is not always the preferred outcome, either in domestic settings or
international ones. Moreover, we know precious little about the actual
contracting behavior of parties to international transactions. Much work
remains to be done.

sâmbătă, 5 aprilie 2008

Demersuri precontractuale

sâmbătă, 29 martie 2008

INCOTERMS

Incoterms 2000 reprezinta termenii comerciali international acceptati ce definesc si statueaza cadrul in care cumparatorul si vanzatorul isi desfasoara rolul in privinta transportului de marfa, proprietatea asupra marfii, asigurarea marfii.
INCOTERMS este un acronim pentru INternational COmmerce TERMS ceea ce înseamnă Termeni de Comerţ Internaţional.

În orice contract de vânzare se pune problema stabilirii modalităţilor de livrare, a transferului riscurilor şi a repartizării între vânzător şi cumpărător a cheltuielilor aferente transportului mărfurilor (cheltuieli privind asigurarea mărfii, contravaloarea transportului).

Este anevoioasă rezolvarea acestor formalități de fiecare dată prin inserarea în contract a clauzelor detaliate cuprinzând reglementarea tuturor acestor aspecte. De aceea practica a imaginat o metodă de a scurta drumul până la încheierea contractului, recurgând la termeni comerciali ce condensează într-o formă cat mai simplificată posibil, situaţiile cele mai uzuale.

Uzanţele comerciale au fost la origine, proprii vânzarilor maritime iar înţelesul lor era diferit in functie de loc, de port (maritim sau fluvial), sau de ţară. Acest fapt crea dificultăţi în ceea ce priveşte cunoasterea lor de către părţi, care nu ştiau exact întinderea obligaţiilor lor, deoarece uzanţele cunoşteau accepţiuni variate în funcţie de portul în care se aplicau. De exmplu, o vanzare FOB implica intr-un port obligatia vanzatorului de a incarca marfa la bordul navei, in timp ce intr-un alt port, se impunea numai sa aduca marfa la chei, langa nava. Ori aceste diferente erau stanjenitoare si erau surse de neintelegeri intre parti, fiind extrem de dificil de stabilit care a fost intentia initiala a partilor

Pentru a înlătura aceste inconveniente Camera Internaţională de Comerţ de la Paris , incepand cu anul 1920 a avut iniţiativa si a întreprins codificarea termenilor comerciali cei mai uzuali.

Prima codificare a avut loc in anul 1936, a fost revizuită in anul 1953, completata in 1967, 1976, 1980 şi 1990. Varianta cea mai recenta datează din 1999 fiind publicata in anul 2000 sub titulatura de Incoterms 2000

Incoterms2000 foloseste urmatorii termeni
EXW [Ex Works] --> Proprietatea si riscul trec la cumparator, inclusiv plata costurilor de transport si asigurari, chiar de la usa vanzatorului. Utilizat pentru orice mod de transport
FCA [Free Carrier] --> Proprietatea si riscul sunt ale cumparatorului, el trebuind sa plateasca costurile de transport si asigurari, in momentul din care vanzatorul livreaza bunurile catre transportator. Vanzatorul este obligat sa incarce bunurile in vehiculele de transport, fiind obligatia cumparatorului aceea de a receptiona bunurile sosite.
FAS [Free Alongside Ship] --> Proprietatea si riscul trec catre cumparator, impreuna cu costurile de transport si asigurari, o data bunurile descarcate din vehiculele de transport de catre vanzator. Folosit pentru transportul maritim si pentru cel pe apa continental. Taxele de export ii revin vanzatorului.
FOB [Free On Board] --> Vanzatorul si-a indeplinit obligatia de livrare a marfii in momentul in care aceasta a trecut balustrada navei (copastia) in portul de incarcare convenit. Aceasta inseamna ca toate costurile si riscurile de pierdere sau de avariere a marfii incepand din acest moment se suporta de catre cumparator. Vanzatorul indeplineste formalitatile vamale de export.
CFR [Cost and Freight] --> Vanzatorul angajeaza nava, o incarca si o duce in portul de destinatie convenit.
CIF [Cost, Insurance and Freight] --> Vanzatorul increditeaza marfa navei navlosita de el, achitand navlul pana la portul de destinatie convenit, inclusiv costul asigurarii riscului de pierdere si avariere a marfii pe timpul transportului maritim.
CPT [Carriage Paid To] --> Proprietatea, riscul si costurile de asigurari trec catre cumparator in momentul livrarii catre transportator de catre vanzator. Vanzatorul plateste transportul pana la destinatie. Utilizat pentru orice mod de transport.
CIP [Carriage and Insurance Paid To] --> Transport si asigurare platite pana la: pe langa CPT vanzatorul asigura marfa, in numele si pe contul cumparatorului, contra riscurilor minime de avariere si pierdere.
DAF [Delivered at Frontier] --> Vanzatorul pune marfa la dispozitia cumparatorului la frontiera convenita si indeplineste formalitatile de vamuire la import. Utilizat pentru orice mod de transport
DES [Delivered Ex Ship] --> Vanzatorul suporta cheltuielile si riscurile aducerii marfii in portul de destinatie, punand-o la dispozitia cumparatorului la bordul navei, nevamuita pentru import. Utilizat numai pentru transport maritim si naval continental
DEQ [Delivered Ex Quay (Duty Paid)] --> Livrat franco chei: pe langa DES, vanzatorul plateste vama in tara cumparatorului
DDU [Delivered Duty Unpaid] --> Vanzatorul si-a indeplinit obligatia de livrare in momentul in care marfa a fost pusa la dispozitia cumparatorului, nedescarcata de pe mijlocul de transport si nevamuita la import, la locul de destinatie convenit. Vanzatorul suporta costurile si riscurile legate de aducerea marfii in locul convenit (mai putin taxele vamale, taxele si alte speze oficiale necesare realizarii importului), precum si cheltuielile si riscurile in legatura cu indeplinirea formalitatilor vamale de export.
DDP [Delivered Duty Paid] --> La fel ca la DDU, cu diferenta ca vanzatorul suporta si taxele vamale aferente marfii.

CONTRACT DE BARTER

Art. 1. PÃRŢILE CONTRACTANTE

Societatea Comercialã ............................... cu sediul social în .................. str. ................... nr. ...... judeţul/sector ................... înmatriculată în Registrul comerţului ......... sub nr. ........... având contul de virament nr. .................... deschis la Banca ................. funcţionând potrivit legislaţiei statului ..................... reprezentatã legal prin .................... cetăţean .................... posesor act de identitate/paşaport nr. ................... în calitate de EXPORTATOR şi

Societatea Comercialã ...................... cu sediul social în .................... str. ................. nr. ......... judeţul/sector .................. înmatriculată în Registrul comerţului ......... sub nr. ....... având contul de virament nr. ............. deschis la Banca ............. funcţionând potrivit legislaţiei statului .................... reprezentată legal prin .................... cetãţean ........................ posesor act de identitate/paşaport nr. ............... în calitate de IMPORTATOR.

Art. 2. OBIECTUL CONTRACTULUI

Obiectul prezentului contract este import-export de ............... (se trece grupa de produse, mărfuri), respectiv (se trece denumirea produsului, mãrfii din cadrul grupei) ..................................... de provenienţă .......... .............................................. .

Art. 3. RAPORTUL DE SCHIMB

În baza preţurilor existente pe piaþa mondialã, a condiþiilor specifice ale mãrfurilor, a valorii finanţării asupra produsului, mărfii care se livreazã în avans şi a termenelor de livrare diferite (întrucât sunt foarte rare cazurile când ambele partide sau ambele loturi se livreazã simultan), pãrţile contracte convin următorul raport de schimb:

............................................. buc./kg/tone (se trece unitatea de mãsurã) cu livrare în lunile ............................ anul ...........

contra

................................................. buc./kg/tone (se trece unitatea de mãsurã) cu livrare în lunile ............................ anul ...............

Exportatorul va lira produsele (mãrfurile) ..........A................. conform regula INCOTERMS ........................................

Importatorul va livra produsele (mãrfurile) .........B.................. conform regula INCOTERMS ...........................................

Art. 4. PLATA

Importatorul va deschide o garanţie bancarã irevocabilă în valoare de ................ (se stabileşte la preţul aproximativ al produsului/mărfii) ................................... şi produsului/mãrfii .................... luate în calcul la stabilirea raportului de barter plus .............% contravaloarea dobânzilor aferente.

În cazul în care importatorul nu va efectua livrãrile de .......... exportatorul va trece la încasarea garanţiei bancare, fãrã avizul importatorului, şi se va acoperi de pe piaţa externă cu cantitatea de .................... prevãzutã în contractul de barter, urmând ca în cazul în care, din banii pe care i-a încasat pentru garanţia bancară, nu se acoperã contravaloarea cantităţii prevãzută în contractul de barter, diferenţa să şi-o acopere pe cheltuiala şi riscul importatorului, conform condiţiilor din prezentul contract.

Art. 5. CALITATEA PRODUSELOR (MĂRFURILOR)

Calitatea produsului/mărfii ................A............................... este (se face descriere calitativă) ...................................... conform certificatului întocmit de o societate specializată în control calitativ şi cantitativ de pe piaţa internaţională, agreată de pãrţi.

Calitatea produsului/mărfii ........B.............................. este (se face descrierea calitativã) ...................................... conform certificatului întocmit de o societate specializatã în control calitativ şi cantitativ pe piaţa internaţională, agreatã de părţi.

Art. 6. CONDIŢIILE DE ÎNCĂRCARE - DESCĂRCARE

Părţile contractante convin condiţiile de încărcare-descărcare conform uzanţelor/normelor din portul de încărcare-descărcare a mărfurilor/produselor respective.

Art. 7. RASPUNDEREA CONTRACTUALA

Pentru nerespectarea totalã sau parţială sau pentru executarea defectuoasã a vreuneia din clauzele contractuale, partea vinovată se obligã să plăteascã daune.

Art. 8. FORŢA MAJORĂ

Forţa majoră apără de răspundere partea care o invocă. Prin caz de forţă majoră se înţeleg împrejurările care au intervenit dupã încheierea contractului, ca urmare a unor evenimente extraordinare, neprevãzute şi inevitabile pentru una din părţi.

Pot fi reţinute ca forţă majoră următoarele situaţii: conflicte de muncă, incendii, mobilizare, rechiziţie, interdicţia transferului de devize, insurecţia, calamităţi naturale.

Partea care invocă forţa majoră are obligaţia să o aducã la cunoştinţa celeilalte părţi, în scris, în maximum ..... zile de la apariţie, iar dovada forţei majore, împreună cu avertizare asupra efectelor şi întinderii posibile a forţei majore, se va comunica în maximum ............ zile de la apariţie.

Data de referinţă este data ştampilei poştei de expediere. Dovada va fi certificată de Camera de Comerţ şi Industrie sau alt organism abilitat de legea statului care o invocă.

Partea care invocã forţa majoră are obligaţia să aducă la cunoştinţa celeilalte părţi încetarea cauzei acesteia în maximum ............. zile de la încetare.

Dacã aceste împrejurări şi consecinţele lor durează mai mult de 6 luni, fiecare partener poate renunţa la executarea contractului pe mai departe. În acest caz, nici una din părţi nu are dreptul de a cere despăgubiri de la cealaltã parte, dar ele au îndatorirea de a-şi onora toate obligaţiile până la aceastã dată.

Art. 9. LITIGII

Litigiile apărute între parteneri în timpul derulãrii prezentului contract se vor rezolva pe cale amiabilă.

Dacã partenerii nu ajung la o înţelegere amiabilă, atunci litigiile vor fi înaintate spre rezolvare Curþii de Arbitraj de pe lângă Camera de Comerţ şi Industrie a României.

Curtea de Arbitraj va soluþiona litigiile în conformitate cu regulamentul şi regulile sale de procedură, pe baza prevederilor prezentului contract şi a dreptului român.

Litigiile se vor soluţiona în România, la Bucureşti.

Deciziile Curţii de Arbitraj vor fi definitive şi obligatorii.

Art. 10. DISPOZIŢII FINALE

Prezentul contract are următoarele anexe:

Contractul intrã în vigoare la data semnãrii de cãtre pãrţi.

Completãrile şi/sau modificările aduse la prezentul contract nu sunt valabile şi opozabile decât dacã rezultă expres din acte semnate de ambele părţi contractante.

Cesionarea prezentului contract este posibilã numai prin acordul scris al părţilor contractante.

Prezentul contract a fost încheiat în þara ............... oraşul .......... în limba .............. în ............ exemplare, cu aceeaşi putere valabilă, câte un exemplar pentru fiecare parte contractantă.

EXPORTATOR, IMPORTATOR,

Caracterul international al \"Regulilor INCOTERMS \" este evidentiat si de faptul ca in fiecare \"Declaratie vamala in detaliu\", trebuie mentionat obligatoriu si sigla conditiei de livrare \"INCOTERMS\" sub auspiciile careia se deruleaza in trafic international marfurile(bunurile) care fac obiectul declaratiei vamale.

Statisticile internationale confirma ca \"Regulile INCOTERMS\" sunt utilizate in toata lumea, ceea ce motiveaza caracterul de \"universale\" care li se atribuie, desi la origine ele provin din spatiul european.In prezent, ele au intrat in folosinta curenta in China, in tarile africane si sud americane, Orientul Apropiat, Mijlociu si Indepartat.

Totusi, in practica exista o exceptie importanta in relatii internationale de schimb; este vorba de unii comercianti din Statele Unite care insista sa fie folosite propriile lor reguli care sunt cuprinse in RAFTD-1941 (Revised American Foreign Trade Definition) care difera putin de regulile cuprinse in \"INCOTERMS-2000\"(conditia FOB are 6 variante in RAFTD).Aces fenomen este cunoscut in cercurile comerciale internationale sub numele de \"pericolul FOB-ului american\", fapt ce reclama acordarea unei atentii deosebite la incheierea unui contract de vanzare internationala cu unii perteneri din SUA, la utilizarea conditiei FOB.

Varietatea marfurilor ce fac obiectul tranzactiei internationale, modalitatile si tehnologiile noi de transport, uzantele internationale inca in vigoare pe plan international si national, uzantele portuare etc. au impus redactarea \"Regulilor INCOTERMS-2000\" cu o relativa nuanta de generalitate care sa permita aplicarea lor in toate cazurile in care se va apela la ele. Astfel, comerciantul isi va putea alege un \"termen\" INCOTERMS cat mai apropiat de scopurile lui, imbunatatindu-i elementele generale cu \"prevederi suplimentare exprese\" ( precizarea expresa a punctelor geografice de operare a riscurilor si a tarifelor; in caz contrar cumparatorul suporta riscurile si costurile suplimentare rezultate din ignorarea acestei cerinte), pe care le va inscrie bineinteles in contractul de vanzare internationala.
Obligatia cumparatorului de a preciza locul unde sa primeasca marfa (locul convenit) este materializata in \"Regulile INCOTERMS - 2000\" prin sirul de puncte inscrise dupa fiecare sigla INCOTERMS.
Cumparatorul este obligat sa precizeze \"natura si felul ambalajului\" cu care vanzatorul va trebui sa protejeze marfa, si care, de regula, sunt conditionate de modalitatea de transport convenita in contract. \"Regulile INCOTERMS\" nu reprezinta modalitati de transport care urmeaza a fi utilizate, cu exceptia transportului maritim care beneficiaza de sigle separate. Astfel, denumirea modalitatii de transport alese trebuie mentionata expres in contract, inclusiv ambalajul ce va fi utilizat, cumparatorul fiind cel mai interesat sa introduca in contract mentiunile respective.
De asemenea, in contractul de vanzare internationala a marfurilor, partile vor conveni si preciza atat modalitatile de transport, cat si restul operatiunilor ce vor fi necesare realizarii deplasarii marfurilor la destinatie (incarcarea si descarcarea, depozitarea si transbordarea, pozitionarea containerelor, calarea si arimarea etc).
Precizarile respective vor trebui sa nominalizeze expres in responsabilitatea cui (vanzatorul/cumparatorul) vor cadea efectuarea si plata prestatiilor respective.
\"Regulile INCOTERMS - 2000\" au rezolvat in principiu aceasta problema, dar numai la expedierile multimodale, in sensul ca pentru aceste expeditii s-a prevazut ca obligatiile respective cu privire la incarcare sau descarcare sunt in sarcina celui ce controleaza echipele si materialele/ echipamentele necesare desfasurarii operatiunilor in ...locul convenit. Acest principiu prezinta importanta mai ales la livrarile multimodale in conditia \"FCA\", dar si la cele din grupa \"D\", insa este greu de aplicat la transporturile maritime conventionale, mai ales daca ne referim la navigatia de linie (conditia \"liner terms\"utilizata de companiile proprietare a liniilor regulate de navigatie). Pentru evitarea unor surprize, comerciantii vor trebui sa precizeze suplimentar in contract conditiile speciale ale liniei regulate maritime cu care va fi efectuat transportul si care se vor regasi si in contractul de transport propriu zis incheiat in acest scop.

Odata cu \"Regulile INCOTERMS - 2000\" a fost convenita o grupare ierarhizata a conditiilor de livrare in care succesiunea acestora este determinata de cresterea obligatiilor pentru vanzator.
Noua grupare cuprinde 4 familii (grupe) de conditii: grupa E, grupa F, grupa C si grupa D, aceasta clasificare avand in vedere in special utilitatea lor.
Grupa E
Litera e provine de la cuvantul \"ex\" . grupa prevede obligatii minime pentru vanzator, in sensul ca acesta are doar obligatia producerii si punerii mafurilor contractate (individualizate) la dispozitia cumparatorului.
Grupa F
Litera F provine de la cuvantul \"free\"(engleza) sau \"franco\"(franceza). Grupa prevede (in general) ca vanzatorul nu isi asuma nici riscul nici costurile pentru transportul principal, insa e obligat sa predea (incredinteze) marfurile unui caraus (transportator) nominat de cumparator.
Termenul de transport principal inseamna acea parte sau fractiune din transportul international al marfurilor in care transportul nu a fost intrerupt desi a strabatut cel putin o frontiera de stat si a fost efectuat pe baza aceluiasi contract de transport.
Privind dinspre expediatia multimodala (containerizata) Ť transport principal Ť al marfurilor poate fi considerat intregul transport de la incarcare (expediere) si pana la descarcare (livrare) fara intreruperi la vreo frontiera sau vreun port, respectiv intregul parcurs sa fie acoperit de acelasi document de expeditie multimodala (document de transport multimodal) indiferent cate modalitati sau mijloace (de transport) sunt utilizate la miscarea containerelor.
Grupa C
Litera C provine de la cuvintele \"cost or carriage\" (engleza)sau \"cout ou port\"(franceza).
Grupa prevede in general ca vanzatorul isi asuma numai tarifele (costurile) pentru transportul principal, fara a-si asuma insa riscurile inclusiv daunele produse marfurilor, si nic costurile suplimentare generate de evenimentele produse ulterior, dupa incarcarea si expeditia marfurilor.
Grupa D
Litera D provine de la cuvantul \"delivered\"(engleza), in franceza cuvantul sinonim fiind \"rendu\".
Grupa prevede(in general) obligatia vanzatorul de a-si asuma riscul si tarifele transportului principal.
Relatiile comerciale intre tarile apartinand UE au scos in evidenta o noua problema: care este diferenta intre un transport national (intern) si un transport international ( cand mijlocul de transport utilizat paraseste teritoriul tarii vanzatorului). In aceasta situatie utlizarea termenului \"free\" sau \"franco\" inseamna ca riscul poate fi in egala masura in sarcina fie a cumparatorului, fie a vanzatorului. In acest caz trebuie sa se faca precizari corespunzatoare la inscrierea vreunei conditii INCOTERMS din grupa F.

Acest caz duce la necesitatea introducerii unui concept nou la vanzare si anume \"vanzarea la plecare\" ( marfurile vor circula pe timpul transportului principal pe riscul cumparatorului) si \"vanzare la sosire\"(marfurile vor circula pe parcursul transportului principal pe riscul vanzatorui).
Astfel, au fost incadrate in categoria \"vanzare la plecare\" conditiile INCOTERMS-2000 :EXW, FCA, FAS, FOB, CFR, CIF, CPT si CIP, iar in categoria \"vanzare la sosire\" : DAF, DFS, DEQ, DDU si DDP.
Denumirea siglelor inclusiv codul prescurtat si specificul acestora (modalitati de transport si sistem de vanzare), pe grupe sunt prezentate in continuare:
Grupa E
a) Conditia de livare \"INCOTERMS\" - 2000: EXW...(EX Works)
Modalitati de transport : toate modalitatile
Sistemul de vanzare: vanzare la plecare.

Grupa F
a) Conditia de livrare Ť INCOTERMS -2000 ť : FCA...(Free Carrier)
Modalitati de transport : toate modalitatile
Sistemul de vanzare : vanzare la plecare
b) Conditia de livrare Ť INCOTERMS -2000 ť : FAS...(Free Alongside Ship).
Modalitati de transport : numai maritim (pe apa).
Sistem de vanzare :vanzare la plecare.
c) Conditia de livare \"INCOTERMS\" - 2000: FOB...(Free On Board)
Modalitati de transport: numai maritime (pe apa).
Sistem de vanzare : vanzare la plecare.
Grupa C
a) Conditia de livare \"INCOTERMS\" - 2000: CFR...(Cost and Freight)
Modalitati de transport : numai maritim (pe apa)
Sistemul de vanzare: vanzare la plecare.
b) Conditia de livare \"INCOTERMS\" - 2000: CIF...(Cost, Insurance, Freight)
Modalitati de transport : numai maritim (pe apa)
Sistemul de vanzare: vanzare la plecare.
c) Conditia de livare \"INCOTERMS\" - 2000: CPT...(Carriage Psid To)
Modalitati de transport : toate modalitatile
Sistemul de vanzare: vanzare la plecare.
d) Conditia de livare \"INCOTERMS\" - 2000: CIP...(Carriage, Insurance, Paid to)
Modalitati de transport : toate modalitatile
Sistemul de vanzare: vanzare la plecare.
Grupa D
a) Conditia de livare \"INCOTERMS\" - 2000: DAF..(Delivered At Frontier)
Modalitati de transport :terestre
Sistemul de vanzare: vanzare la sosire
b) Conditia de livare \"INCOTERMS\" - 2000: DES...(Delivered Ex Ship)
Modalitati de transport : numai maritim (pe apa)
Sistemul de vanzare: vanzare la sosire
c) Conditia de livare \"INCOTERMS\" - 2000: DEQ...(Delivered Ex Quay)
Modalitati de transport : numai maritim (pe apa)
Sistemul de vanzare: vanzare la sosire
d) Conditia de livare \"INCOTERMS\" - 2000: DDU...(Delivered Duty Unpaid)
Modalitati de transport : toate modalitatile
Sistemul de vanzare: vanzare la sosire
e) Conditia de livare \"INCOTERMS\" - 2000: DDP...(Delivered Duty Paid)
Modalitati de transport : toate modalitatile
Sistemul de vanzare: vanzare la sosire

Expresia \"toate modalitatile\" include si transportul multimodal de marfuri, iar expresia \"numai maritim\" se refera atat la transportul de marfuri pe mare si alte ape internationale cat si pe apele interioare (nationale) navigabile.

Alegerea \"Regulei INCOTERMS - 2000\" trebuie facuta in functie de modalitatea de transport ce va fi utilizata, atat cumparatorul cat si vanzatorul trebuind sa tina seama de recomandarile specifice fircarui \"termen\" INCOTERMS, in ceea ce priveste alegerea modalitatii de transport. Astfel:

a) numai pe transportul pe mare si pe cai navigabile interne
Conditiile FAS..., FOB..., CFR..., CIF...(vanzare la plecare).
Conditiile DES..., DEQ...(vanzare la sosire).
b) pentru toate modalitatile de transport, inclusiv transportul mutimodal
Conditiile EXW..., FCA..., CPT..., CIP...(vanzare la plecare).
Conditiile DAF..., DDU..., DDP...(vanzare la sosire).

In principiu in relatiile comerciale uzuale, se practica o regula de baza: vanzatorul, ca sa poata incasa cele cuvenite, trebuie sa-si execute toate obligatiile sale si sa puna marfa la dispozitia cumparatorului.
In cazul unor distante mai mari si o unui timp indelungat necesar transportului, sunt separate si obligatiile vanzatorului de cele ale cumparatorului si principiul enuntat anterior va avea o aplicabilitate diferita.
Acest aspect se evidentiaza in special la livrarile pe mare FOB...,CFR... si CIF..., care utilizeaza sistemul \"vanzarii la plecare\".
\"Regulile INCOTERMS - 2000\" au clarificat in aceasta privinta situatia, stabilind in mod unitatr ca momentul livrarii de catre vanzator si momentul primirii marfii de catre cumparator sa fie unul singur, adica cel al livrarii marfii la bordul navei in portul de incarcare convenit.
Aceasta clarificare a urmarit ca vanzatorul , beneficiar al unui credit documentar, sa poata sa incaseze pretul marfii, imediat ce aceasta a atins bordul navei, prin prezentarea la banca platitoare a unor documente specifice:
In cazul livrarii FOB... vor fi prezentate :factura, specificatii(lista de colisaj), un conosament curat (set sau joc complet) purtand mentiunea ca navlul va fi achitat la destinatie si ca marfa se afla la bordul navei , inclusiv alte documente cerute de creditul documentar.
In cazul livrarii CFR... se vor prezenta aceleasi documente ca mai sus, cu deosebirea ca conosamentul (curat si \"on board\") va purta precizarea ca navalul este achitat. (prepaid).
In cazul livrarii CIF... se vor prezenta aceleasi documente ca la livrarea CFR...plus o polita sau un certificat de asigurare incheiate pentru o suma reprezentant 110 % , procent aplicat valorii marii inscrise in factura.

La incheierea contractului in care se utilizeaza vreuna din cele trei conditii de mai sus, partile vor trebui sa aibe in vedere urmatoarele precizari.
Toate cele trei conditii (FOB..., CFR..., CIF...)obliga vanzatorul sa intocmeasca integral formalitatile vamale necesare exploatarii marfii.
In cazul utilizarii conditiei FOB... partile nu pot conveni decat ca momentul livrarii marfii este acela al trecerii acesteia peste balustrada navei in portul de incarcare,in caz contrar vor trebui sa foloseasca conditia FCA...
In cazul utilizarii conditiei CFR... partile vor tine seama de aceleasi precizari ca la conditia FOB... , iar daca livrarea nu va avea loc prin trecerea balustradei navei, atunci ele vor trebui sa utilizeze conditia de livrare CPT...
In cazul utilizarii conditiei CIF..., partile vor trebui sa tina seama de precizarile amintite in cazul livrarilor FOB... si CFR... iar in caz contrar vor putea utiliza numai conditia de livrare CIP... .

In principiu, trebuie observat la \"vanzarea la plecare\" ca transferul riscului are loc in acelasi timp pentru toate cele trei conditii (FOB..., CFR...., CIF...),adica in momentul in care transportatorul principal va prelua marfurile. In acest sens, locul in care transportatorul principal va prelua marfa, va corespunde si cu locul livrarii.
Aceasta noua conceptie asupra transferului riscului , respectiv asupra obligatiilor vanzatorului sau cumparatorului, nu difera prea mult de cele stabilite pentru conditiile utilizate la transportul pe apa(FOB..., CFR..., CIF...), in sensul ca la acestea din urma, ca element specific, s-a stabilit ca obligatia efectuarii formalitatilor vamale de export, inclusiv a obtinerii licentei de export incumba numai vanzatorului.
Totusi, tinand seama de caracteristicile proprii fiecarei din cele 3 conditii amintite, transferul riscurilor la acestea imbraca unele particularitati care vor trebui avute in vedere de ambii parteneri la incheierea si derularea contractului si anume:
In cazul conditiei FCA... transferul costurilor se situeaza in acelasi loc cu transferul riscurilor, adica in momentul predarii marfii catre transportatorul principal sau catre tertul (tranzitarul) desemnat de cumparator. Din momentul acestui dublu transfer (la conditia FCA...) vanzatorul nu mai are nici un fel de responasabilitati, deoarece in cazul conditiilor de livrare din grupa \"F\" vanzatorul nu isi va asuma de regula nici un risc si nici o cheltuiala privind transportul principal.
In cazul conditiei CPT ... care in fond nu e decat o conditie FCA...plus cheltuielile pentru transportul principal, adica angajarea mijlocului de transport si plata transportului principal (rutier, aerian, multimodal etc) incumba vanzatorului. Trebuie insa retinut ca in cazul conditiilor de livrare din grupa \"C\" vanzatorul este exonerat de orice risc pe timpul transportului, inclusiv de cheltuielile pentru asigurarea lor, incepand cu momentul in care el si-a indeplinit obligatiile prin incheierea unui contract de transport si punerea marfii la dispozitia transportatorului, motiv pentru care se considera ca conditia CPT..., este in fond o conditie FCA... plus cheltuielile cu angajarea si efectuarea transportului principal.
In cazul conditiei CIP... care in estenta este o conditie de livrare CPT... plus costurile de asigurare ce vor fi achitate de vanzator, trebuie avute in vedere :
obligatia vanzatorului de a achita polita de asigurare este aceeasi atat pentru conditia de livrare CIP... cat si pentru conditia CIF
chiar daca costul asigurarii este acoperit de vanzator (pe ruta transportului principal) atat conditia de livrare CIP... cat si conditia CIF , raman un termen INCOTERMS de \"vanzare la plecare\", adica vanzatorul asigura si achita costul asigurarii, insa marfa va calatori pe riscul cumparatorului inca din momentul in care a fost remisa transportatorului.
Principiul \"incarcarea/descarcarea este in sarcina celui cre comanda si are controlul asupra echipelor si mijloacelor necesare\" se aplica cel mai bine la contractele incheiate cu conditia de livrare FCA... precum si in cazul marfurilor transportate cu containere in sistem FCL.

Conditia EXW...named place (INCOTERMS - 2000) este cunoscuta sub numele de \"franco uzina\", este aplicabila pentru toate modalitatile de transport; aceasta conditie semnifica faptul ca vanzatorul a livrat marfa din momentul in care a pus-o la dispozitia cumparatorului, intr-un local propriu sau in alt loc convenit, fara a fi insotita de formalitati vamale de export si fara a fi incarcata in vreun mijloc de transport destinat preluarii acesteia.
poate fi considerata un model clasic de \"vanzare la plecare\", vanzatorul avand minim de obligatii fata de cumparator;
conditia EXW ...loaded prevede ca transportatorul ia in primire mijlocul de transport incarcat si sigilat de incarcator si nu raspunde de incarcatura decat in caz de violarea mijlocului de transport si a sigiliilor aplicate de expeditor.
Conditia EXW... ofera comerciantilor posibilitatea de a utiliza termenii de livrare in functie de posibilitatile partenerilor, regula insa obligandu-i pe acestia sa inscrie explicit in contract cele convenite colateral fata de reglementarea clasica. Lipsa acestor precizari in contract , sunt in avantajul vanzatorului, care se va putea rezuma numai la obligatiile minimale stabilite pentru conditia EXW...
Intocmirea formalitatilor vamale de export revine cumparatorului . in cazul in care nu este in stare, va trebui utilizata conditia FCA... cu mentiunea (sub rezerva) ca vanzatorul accepta sa incarce marfurile pe costurile si riscurile sale.
Utilizarea conditiei \"FCA...\"in locul conditiei \"EXW...loaded\" este motivata in cazul in care obiectul contractului extern il constituie produse de serie care sunt desfacute si pe piata interna. Astfel, cumparatorul care in general nu trebuie sa faca o dovada expresa ca marfa a fost exportata din tara de cumparare, va putea vinde marfa pe piata interna la un pret mai mic decat al vanzatorului, facandu-i astfel,indirect, concurenta. Tot in legatura cu utizarea conditiei EXW... cumparatorul va trebui sa urmareasca sa fie precizate in contract modalitatile si tehnologiile ce vor fi utilizate la ambalarea si individualizarea marfii ceea ce e si in avantajul vanzatorului, acesta putand aprecia costul pe care trebuie sa il suporte.
In contract se va mentiona locul convenit exact si complet.
Conditia de livrare FAS...(Free Alongside Ship...named port of shipment) conform \"INCOTERMS - 2000\" face parte din familia de termeni \"F\" impreuna cu \"FCA\" si \" FOB\".
vanzatorul nu este obligat sa asigure riscurile si nici sa achite costurile pe timpul transportului principal, acesti termeni apartinand sistemului \"vanzare la plecare\".
Poate fi utilizata in cazul transportului pe cai maritime si cai navigabile interne
Obligatia intocmirii formalitatilor de vamuire la export revine vanzatorului.
\"Vanzatorul face dovada ca a livrat marfa atunci cand a plasat-o de-a lungul navei in portul de incarcare convenit\"(publicatia 560 a CIC-Paris).
\"Ori de cate ori partile vor conveni ca operatiunile de vamuire la export sa fie efectuate de cumparator, ele vor trebui sa inscrie aceasta in mod explicit in contractul de vanzare internationala\" (publicatia 560 a CIC-Paris).
In contract trebui mentionate regulile si principiile utilizate la derularea afacerii.
Conditia de livrare DAF...(Delivered at Frontier...named place)
(INCOTERMS-2000)
Apartine sistemului \"vanzare la sosire\".
\"vanzatorul si-a indeplinit obligatia fata de cumparator, in momentul in care a livrat marfa, vamuita la export si incarcata pe un mijloc de transport adecvat, in punctul de frontiera (convenita) situat inainte de trecerea frontierei tarii cumparatorului(nevamuita la import).(publicatia 560 a CIC-Paris).
Transport rutier sau feroviar.
Vor trebui incheiate doua asigurari pentru un singur transport, una pentru vanzator (asigurarea pana la frontiera) si una pentru cumparator(asigurarea de la frontiera pana la destinatia finala).
Costurile si riscurile privind transbordarea sunt in sarcina cumparatorului.
Printr-o mentiune in contract, costurile si riscurile privind transbordarea in frontiera pot fi trecute in sarcina vanzatorului.
Cumparatorul trebuie sa mentioneze clar in contract despre care frontiera este vorba si punctul exact de pe aceasta frontiera.
In dezavantajul vanzatorului ar fi clauza furnizarii de catre cumparator a unui document care sa certifice trecerea frontierei si care sa conditioneze prin depunerea sa , incasarea drepturilor ce se cuvin vanzatorului pentru livrarea efectuata.
Conditiile de livrare DES...(Delivered ex ship...named port of destination) si DEQ...(Delivered Ex Quay...named port of destination) apartin sistemului \"vanzare la sosire\" si sunt utilizate numai in cazul transportului pe mare si pe cai navigabile interne.
\"Conditia de livrare DES...\"
vanzatorul livreaza marfa ,nevamuita la import, pe bordul navei in portul de destinatie convenit.
Este utilizata de obicei pentru marfurile voluminoase care necesita navlosirea in exclusivitate a unei nave sau a unui slep(minereuri, grane, titei, diverse produse in stare bruta etc).
Cumparatorul asigura accesul navei la o dana sau un alt loc adecvat de pe cheu, pentru descarcare. Cumparatorul are obligatia sa indice exact cheul si dana, respectiv amplasamentul exact al locului de operare la descarcare.
Vanzatorul are dreptul sa ceara comunicarea conditiilor de acces al navei la locul de descarcare impus de cumparator sau uzantele portuare si nivelul contrastaliilor ce trebuie platite in cazul nerespectarii ritmurilor prevazute.
Vanzatorul trebuie sa anunte cumparatorul de momentul exact al sosirii navei in portul de destinatie (comunicarea ETA).
Vanzatorul si-a indeplinit obligatia de livrare in momentul in care marfurile nevamuite la import au fost puse la dispozitia cumparatorului, pe nava, in portul de destinatie convenit.
Conditia de livrare \"DEQ...\"
Cumparatorul efectueaza formalitatile vamale de import si achita toate costurile legate de acestea, inclusiv toate taxele vamale, taxele si alte redevente exigibile pentru realizarea importului.
Partile pot conveni in contract includerea in mod expres a obligatiei vanzatorului de a suporta in totalitate sau partial cheltuielile aferente operatiunilor de import aferente marii; aceasta trebuie inscrisa in clauze explicite in contractul de vanzare internationala.
Prin intelegere reciproca, pot accepta in contract conditia de livrare \"DEQ...vamuit , drepturile vamale neachitate\". In acest caz vanzatorul organizeaza si realizeaza vamuirea la import pe riscul si cheltuiala sa, iar drepturile vamale , taxele si redeventele aferente urmand sa fie achitate de cumparator, in totalitate, in conformitate cu clauzele inscrise in contractul de vanzare interntionala, la incheierea si semnarea lui.
Daca partile convin sa includa in obligatiile vanzatorului si asumarea riscurilor si cheltuielilor pentru manipularea marfii pana pe un cheu sau in alt loc (antrepozit, terminal, statie feroviara de marfuri etc)situat in interiorul sau exteriorul portului, se recomanda sa fie utilizate conditiile \"DDU...\" si \"DDP...\"
Conditiile \"DDU...\"(Delivered Duty Unpaid ...named place of destination) si \"DDP...\"(Delivered Duty Paid...named place of destination) apartin grupei \"D\" si apartin sistemului de vanzare \"vanzare la sosire\". Pot fi utilizate pentru toate modalitatile de transport, inclusive pentru transportul modal de marfuri.
In conditia \"DDU...\" vanzatorul livreaza marfa nevamuita pentru import si nedescarcata la sosire, indiferent de felul mijloacelor de transport folosite.
Cumparatorul are obligatia sa efectueze operatiunile de vamuire la import si trebuie sa suporte toate cheltuielile suuplimentare de stationare a marfii, inclusiv riscurile datorate neefectuarii la timp a acestor operatiuni din momentul punerii marfii la dispozitie, cu conditia ca aceasta marfa sa apartina efectiv contractului.
In conditia \"DDP...\" vanzatorul suporta efectuarea formalitatilor vamale de import, drepturile vamale si alte taxe oficiale aferente.
Partile pot conveni intre ele utilizarea unor variante bine precizate cu ajutorul clauzelor inscrise in contract , mai ales in ceea ce priveste suportarea costurilor si riscurilor legate de intocmirea formalitatilor de import, care vor putea fi preluate total sau partial fie de cumparator, fie de vanzator.
Vanzatorul trebuie sa nu accepte semnarea unui contract care sa il oblige la respectarea unei date calendaristice sau a unui termen situat dupa efectuarea operatiunii de vamuire la import, nerespectarea acestuia provocand intarzierea incasarii contravalorii marfii.
Vanzatorul nu este obligat sa descarce marfa din mijlocul de transport cu care a sosit in locul convenit, indiferent de mijlocul de transport utilizat. Costurile si riscurile privind descarcarea sunt in sarcina cumparatorului, ceea ce constituie o noutate in raport cu vechile reguli Ť INCOTERMS - 2000 Ť .
Daca partile vor conveni ca toate costurile si riscurile sa fie exclusiv in sarcina cumparatorului, atunci va trebui utilizata \"conditia DDU...\".
In practica, comerciantii vor trebui sa se fereasca sa confunde conditiile INCOTERMS cu conditiile \"liner terms\" de operare a navelor in porturi si sa nu uite ca primele se refera explicit la contractul de vanzare internationala, in timp ce celelalte la contractul de transport maritim, fara sa se suprapuna.
Regulile de operare a navelor sunt legate de \"uzante portuare\" si ca urmare, comerciantii, atunci cand apeleaza la conditiile de operare \"liner terms\" practicate in porturile respective trebuie sa le precizeze (detaileze) in contractul de baza (de vanzare internationala).
In relatiile intra-comunitare, din cele 13 \"conditii de livrare\" (INCOTERMS - 2000) doar cateva se utilizeaza in mod curent. Conditia EXW... in relatiile intra-comunitare nu se utilizeaza deoarece practic vanzatorul isi asuma operatiunea de incarcare a marfurilor iar cumparatorul doar in mod exceptional. De asemenea, la conditiile \"DDU...\"si \"DDP...\" nemaifiind necesare intocmirea de formalitati vamale, utilizarea lor in tranzactiile comerciale capata un singur sens, ambele incluzand automat costurile operatiunilor de descarcare, vanzatorul trebuind in acest caz sa ofere la destinatie, in locul convenit, marfurile libere de orice obligatie si costuri. Intr-un viitor apropiat, tarile comunitare vor utiliza in cadrul pietii comune, in relatiile dintre ele, doar doua conditii de livrare :\"franco caraus...\"(FCA...) si \"Franco destinatie...\"(DDU.../DDP...).

marți, 18 martie 2008

IZVOARELE INTERNATIONALE ALE DREPTULUI COM.INT

Izvoarele internat. ale dr. comertului internat. sunt formate din conventiile si uzantele comerciale.
In dreptul international un rol important il are arbitarjul, jurisprudenta si doctrina.
Conventiile comerciale internationale
Conventiile comerciale internationale reprezintd intelegeri scrise intre doua sau mai multe state privind reglementarea problemelor de comert exterior.
In dezvoltarea schimburilor internationale conventiile comerciale au o pondere si un rol foarte important. In cuprinsul acestora sunt precizate dr si obligatiile partilor si prin aceasta se asigura corecta lor indeplinire, precum si stabilitatea raporturilor juridice.
Conventiile multilaterale
Conventiile comerciale multilaterale nu sunt foarte numeroase dar ele au un rol deosebit prin aceea ca ele au o sfera larga de reglementare. Ele au un dublu rol in sensul ca ele contribuie la unificarea normeleor de drept material si conflictual privind comertul international.
Din prima categoric, respectiv a conventiilor internationale ce contribuie la unificarea normelor de drept material amintim:
• Legea uniforma pentru formarea contractelor de vanzare internationala de bunuri, (ULFIS), Haga, iunie 1964
• Conventia referitoare la legea uniforma asupra vanzarii internationale de bunuri mobile corporate Haga, iulie 1964 (ULIS)
• Conventia Natiunilor Unite de la Viena din 11 aprilie 1980
Din cea de a doua categoric, cu privire la unificarea normelor de drept conflictual cele mai semnificative sunt:
• Conventia de la Haga asupra legii aplicabile vanzariii cu caracter international de bunuri mobile corporale din 15 iunie 1955,
• Conventia de la Haga din 22 decembrie 1986 asupra legii aplicabile vanzariii internationale de bunuri mobile corporale (scopul a fost acela de a revizui conventia din 1955 si de a suplimenta si facilita aplicarea conventiei Organizatiei Natiunilor Unite de la Viena din 1980.
• Conventia comunitara din 19 iunie 1980 asupra legii aplicabile obligatiilor contractuale (Conventia de la Roma din 1980)
• Conventia asupra legii aplicabile contr. de intermediere si de reprezentare de la Haga din 1978
In domeniile comertul international, intilnim urmatoarele conventii:
• conventiile asupra arbitarjului comerciale
• conventiile privind instrumentele de plata
• conventiile vamale
• conventiile cu privire la transportul international
• conventiile cu privire la proprietatea industriala
• conventiile Conferintei de drept international privat de la Haga privind Unificarea dreptului
• conventiile sub egida ONU
Conventiile bilaterale
Acestea constituie o modalitate juridica importanta si eficienta. In relatiile comerciale conventiile bilaterale sunt foarte numeroase.
Folosirea cu prioritate a Conventiile bilaterale prin faptul ca realizeaza un echilibru intre cerintele celor doua state si contribuie la mentinerea unor relatii favorabile scimburilor internationale. Facem precizarea ca in mare parte, conventiile bilaterale sunt mai mult izvoare de drept conflictual decat de dreptul material.
In practica internationala conventiile bilaterale sunt utilizate sub forma tratatelor si acordurilor.

TRATATUL COMERCIAL
Este actul juridic exprimind acordul de vointa a doua sau mai multe state in temeiul caruia acestea reglementeaza o anumita sfera a relatiilor internationale, forma
prin care statele isi organizeaza schimburile de marfuri, creand in felul acesta norme noi de drept international, modificand ori abrogand norme de drept international existente.
Tot prin intermediul tratatelor se solutioneaza si aspectele adiacente relatiilor comerciale cum ar fi: transportul marfurilor, regimul vama, tranzitul, situatia juridica a reprezentantelor, a agentiilor comerciale, a oficiilor consulare precum si a persoanelor fizice sau juridice ce savarsesc fapte de comert pe teritoriu celuilalt stat.
Tratatele multilaterale prezinta o importanta deosebita ca izvor de drept al comertului international, deoarece statornicesc norme uniforme de drept material sau conflictual prin care se reglement. amimite raporturi de comert exterior si cooperare economica si tehnico-stiintifica.
Atunci cand problemele comerciale sunt reglementate impreuna cu cele de navigatie avem de a face cu tratatul de comert si navigatie.

CONTINUTUL TRATATULUI COMERCIAL
Tratatul de comert este format din principii generale care prezinta un cadru juridic pentru o perioada mai indelungata. Pe baza acestuia (tratat anual) se incheie intelegeri comerciale.
Tratatul este alcatuit din : titlu, preambul si continut (un numar variabil de articole).
Titlul cuprinde denumirea tratatului si statele semnatare; preambulul se refera la vointa partilor de a promova si dezvolta relatiile lor comerciale. Continutul este format dintr-o serie de clauze dintre care cele mai importante sunt:
a)clauza natiunii celei mai favorizate;
b)clauza regimului national
Clauza natiunii celei mai favorizate inseamna ca tarile semnatare isi acorda reciproc conditii si inlesniri comerciale, la fel de favorabile ca oricarui alt stat tert. In practica relatiilor comerciale intilnim aceasta clauza in doua forme:
• forma neconditionata sau principiul egalitatii care presupune ca partile isi confera, fara rezerve sau restrictii, privilegiile si avantajele recunoscute unei tari terte
• forma conditionata sau principiul compensatiei care inseamna ca privilegiile si avantajele acordate unui stat tert sunt extinse intre parti numai in schimbul unor conditii speciale si compensatii reciproce.
Clauza natiunii celei mai favorizate poate prezenta si o forma modificata. In aceasta forma aplicarea tratamentului favorizant este sub rezerva unor anumite avantaje sau facilitati. In genere se acorda numai unor state rezultind dintr-o uniune vamala, zona a liberului schimb sau in alte intelegeri comerciale intervenite in relatiile bilaterale. Clauza regimului national sau principiul posibilitatilor egale consta in faptul ca persoanele, apartinand unei tari straine care desfasoara activitati de comert pe teritoriul statului partener, au in principiu, aceleasi drepturi si obligatii ca si nationalii.
In domeniul vast al dreptului comertului international putem intalni termeni ce desemneaza trataul, ca de exemplu: act final, acord, aranjament, conventie, declaratie, concordat, memorandum, pact, modus vivendi, protocol, gentlemen's agreement, aide memoire, statut.

ACORDUL COMERCIAL
Este o intelegere convenita intre doua sau mai multe tari prin care se stabilesc modalitati si reguli de desfasurare a raporturilor comerciale al tarilor respective intre ele, ori privind cooperarea pe terte piete. Acordul se poate referi in general la comert sau numai la anumite domenii ale comertului international.
Acordul comercial reprezinta actul juridic prin care se reglementeaza schimbul de marfuri intre tarile semnatare. Prin acordul comercial international se reglementeaza de regula:
• instituirea sistemului de plati prin clearing sau devize libere
• nivelul platilor
• reduceri si scutiri de taxe vamale
• instituirea sua elimeinarea de contingente
• acordarea reciproca a clauzei natiunii cele mai favorizate.
Acordurile comerciale internationale pot fi:
- Pe termen scurt (adica anuale); - Pe termen mediu (2-3 ani); - Pe termen lung (5 sau mai multi ani).
Continutul acordului comercial international
Un acordul comercial este alcatuit din doua parti: textul propriu-zis si anexele. Textul acordul comercial international este format din titlul, preambul si un numar de articole.
In titlu si preambul se arata obiectul, precum si scopul pentru care s-a incheiat acordul comercial. De asemenea, in preambul se specifica motivele care au stat la baza intelegerii.
Articolele acordului contin dispozitii de dr international, administrativ, sau de dr fiananciar. Ele se refera la urmatoarele domenii:
- contingentele de marfuri stabilite in listele anexe,
- modalitatea si termenul de contractare a contingentelor,
- nivelul de preturi,
- instituirea unui regim preferential,
- eliberarea licentelor de export si import,
- reglementari vamale,
- comisiile mixte,
- reglementarea reexporturilor,
- modul de efectuare a platilor,
- conditia persoanelor fizice si juridice straine,
- solutionarea litigiilor,
- modul de lichidare a acordurilor,
- valabilitatea acordului si modul de prelungire a acestuia.
Articolele pot cuprinde si unele stipulatii speciale; astfel pot fi reglementate o serie de operatiuni ca tranzitul, prelucrarea marfurilor, si alte prestatiuni si servicii.
Anexele au rolul de a exemplifica si interpreta principiile generate inserate in textul acordului; felul si numarul anexelor fiind determinat de specificul acordului comercial.

UZANTELE COMERCIALE INTERNATIONALE (Uzurile comerciale)
Uzantele comerciale sunt reguli conturate prin folosirea repetata a unor clauze contractuale, in armonie cu obiceiurile practicate in comertul international. Cea ce caracterizeaza uzantele sau uzurile comerciale este continuitatea, constanta si uniformitatea.
Folosirea uzantelor elimina tratativele indelungate dintre parteneri si contribuie astfel la incheirea mai rapida a contractelor.
Felurile uzantelor
Aplicand sau folosind diferite criterii putem desprinde mai multe feluri de uzante.
Sunt uzante locale, cele determinate dupa un criteriu geografic, in sensul ca se aplica la o anumita piata comerciala, localitate, port sau regiune,etc.
Uzantele speciale sunt acelea al caror criteriu il formeaza ob. contr. respective ori ramurile de activitate, cum ar fi uzantele de cereale, sau cele ale unei profesiuni (ca de ex.agentii de bursa).
Uzante generale sunt acelea care se aplicala intregului ansamblu de relatii comerciale, independent de obiectul contractului, ramura de activitate, profesiunea partilor sau alte asemenea criterii. De exemplu, uzantele potrivit carora daca intr-un contract nu s-au stipulat precizari cu privire la calitatea marfii aceasta calitate va fi cea locala si comerciala potrivit uzantelor de concurenta loiala.
Uzantele pot fi specifice cand se folosesc in anumite branse in genere care sunt aplicabile pentru toate marfurile. Cel mai des intilnite au ca obiect conditiile de livrare, platile dintre partenerii externi, asigurarile de marfuri ce fac obiectul unui contract international.
Uzante normative si uzante conventionale
O distictie importanta cu consecinte juridice deosebite se face intre uzantele de drept (legale sau normative) si uzantele conventionale sau de fapt.
A.Uzantele normative (uzante de drept legale, denumite uneori si cutume)
Sunt acele uzante care au valoare de norma de drept, deoarece nu-si au izvorul in vointa partilor ca uzantele conventionale, nu fac parte din domeniul autonomiei de vointa, ci isi trag forta dintr-o practica sau jurisprudenta bine stabilita, care le acorda o autoritate proprie. La asemenea uzante se refera legea cand spune de pilda , ca un contract obliga partite nu numai la ceea ce se afla, in mod expres cuprins in el, ci si la toate consecintele ce deriva din acesta potrivit legii, potrivit uzantelor si echitatii (art.970 "conventiile obliga nu numai la ceea ce este expres in ele dar la toate urmarile ce echitatea, obiceiul sau legea, da obligatiei dupa natura sa" o prevedere similara gasim si in cod civil roman si in art. 1374 codului civil italian.
B.Uzantele conventionale
Uzantele conventionale sunt cele care-si au originea in vointa contractantilor, care au deplina libertate, in virtutea autonomiei de vointa, sa stabileasca potrivit aprecierii lor, continutul contr.pe care incheie. Acest gen de uzante se formeaza de regula spontan, la initiativa unui partener contractual. Ele au ca urmare satisfactia ambilor contractanti, pe care acestia urmeaza a le utiliza si in raporturile lor viitoare si chiar a le oferi si altor subiecti de drept care convin sa perfecteze contr. de acelasi fel cu cel intervenit intre aceia are au statornicit uzanta respectiva.
Preluarea solutiei respective si de catre alti parteneri contractuali "cat si respectarea ei de acestia in derularea raportului juridic, a determinat formarea in timp a unei practici in acest sens". Pe aceasta cale s-au format, contractele tip, in care au fost incorporate uzantele comerciale existente in domeniul vizat de respectivele contracte.
Avand un caracter spontan uzantele conventionale prezinta inconvenientul de a fi incerte si imprecise. Aceste inconveniente pot fi inlaturate pe doua cai:
1.prin certificarea existentei si continutului lor data de camerele de comert, la cererea organului de jurisdictie sau a partii intersate atunci cand uzantele sunt invocate in fata instantei sau arbitrajului;
2. prin formularea pe care le-o dau organizatiile profesionale dintr-un anumit domeniu. Astfel, de exemplu, Camera Internationala de Comert, in domeniul bancar, a uniformizat asa numitele Usances de credit documentaire (R.egulile si uzantele uniforme la creditele documentare, Conditiile generale de vanzare si contractele model, elaborate sub auspiciile Comisiei Economice pentru Europa a ONU, Conditiile generale si contr. tip adoptate de asociatiile comerciale internati.
Uzantele mai prezinta un caracter colectiv, in sensul ca ele implica o practica de masa, nascuta din preluarea si repetarea, in alte ocazii, a acelorasi acte sau practici, de catre parti contractante, de obicei in aceeasi ramura de activitate sau categoric profesionala.
Uzantele comerciale sunt in esenta lor profesionale deaorece atat formularea lor cat si participarea lor (cu caracter de masa) se realizeaza cu participarea subiectilor de drept implicati in derularea comertului.
Uzantele sunt incluse, de regula, in continutul contractului, deci forta lor juridica nu o depaseste pe cea a clauzelor contractuale.
Aceasta situatie este fireasca deoarece inserarea lor in contract se face de catre parti (implicit sau explicit), cu titlu de clauza contractuala, si nu cu titlu de norma juridica apartinand sistemului de drept national din tara unde le s-au format.
Si in sfarsit, uzantele conventionale, nu pot indeplini prin ele insele, functia de drept aplicabil contractului, lucru normal, deoarece apartin domeniului contractului. Rolul lor se reduce la determinarea, precizarea, si completarea continutului contractului.
Conform punctelor de vedere exprimate in doctrina, cutuma este izvorul cel mai vechi al dreptului comertului international, deoarece multe materii ale dreptului s-au format pe cale cutumiara ca de exemplu : dreptul diplomatic, dreptul maritim international.
Ca urmare a cresterii numarului de conventii internationale si a cresterii rolului acestora in reglementarea raporturilor juridice de comert international, in prezent cutuma a inceput sa piarda o mare parte din importanta sa ca izvor al dreptului comertului international.
Prin codificare (standardizare) uzantele comerciale internat., dobandesc o mai mare certitudine pentru domeniile lor de aplicare, constituind adevarate premise ale unui drept material uniform.

Regulile INCOTERMES
Notiuni introductive
In orice contract de vanzare se pune problema stabilirii modalitatilor de livrare, a transferului riscurilor si a repartizarii intre vanzator si cumparator a cheltuielilor aferente transportului marfurilor (cheltuieli privind asigurarea marfii, contravaloarea transportului) .Este mai dificil sa rezolvi aceste chestiuni de fiecare data prin inserarea in contract a clauzelor detaliate cuprinzand reglementarea tuturor acestor aspecte. De aceea practica a imaginat o metoda de a scurta drumul pana la incheierea contractului, recurgand la termeni comerciali ce condenseaza intr-o forma cat mai simplificata posibil, situatiile cele mai uzuale.
Astfel, de exemplu, stipuland simplu intr-un contract ca marfa a fost vanduta FOB Hamburg, partile au vrut sa spuna ca vanzatorul trebuie sa incarce si sa expedieze marfa pana in portul Hamburg pe cheltuiala sa, folosind transportul maritim, in timp ce cumparatorului ii incumba obligatia sa plateasca cheltuielile de navlosire, riscurile netrecand asupra acestuia decat din momentul imbarcarii.
In cazul unui acord CAP Hamburg partile s-au inteles sa puna in sarcina vanzatorului obligatiile suplimentare privind organizarea transportului si de asigurare a marfii, fara o modificare in ceea ce priveste transferul riscurilor.
Termenii acestia comerciali au fost la origine, proprii vanzarilor maritime si intelesul lor era diferit in functie de loc, de port (maritim sau fluvial), sau de tara. Acest fapt crea dificulati in ceea ce priveste cunoasterea de catre parti, care nu stiau exact consecintele exacte ale actelor lor, acestea fiind diferite in fiecare port. De exmplu, o vanzare FOB implica intr-un port obligatia vanzatorului de a incarca marfa la bordul navei, in timp ce intr-un alt port, se impunea numai sa aduca marfa la chei, langa nava. Ori aceste diferente erau stanjenitoare si erau surse de neintelegeri intre parti, fiind extrem de dificil de stabilit care a fost intentia initiala a partilor (Ce s-a convenit de fapt initial).
Pentru a inlatura aceste inconveniente Camera Internationala de Comert de la Paris , ( incepand cu anul 1920) a avut initiativa si a intreprins codificarea termenilor comerciali cei mai uzuali.
Prima codificare a avut loc in anul 1936, a fost revizuita in anul 1953, completata in 1967, 1976,1980 si 1990. Varianta cea mai recenta dateaza din 1999 fiind publicata in anul 2000 (Incoterms 2000, Publication CCI no 560). Aceasta din urma editie aduce doar mici modificari a Regulilor Incoterms 1990, considerata cea mai completa.
INCOTERMS, adica International Rules for the Interpretation of Trade Terms ceea ce inseamna reguli Internationale pentru interpretarea uzantelor de comert, contin un preambul in care se arata ca prevederile acestor reguli nu se impun vointei partilor ( nu au deci caracter obligatoriu), partenerii avand libertatea sa insereze in cuprinsul contractului alte dispozitii speciale. Cele doua parti se pot referi la Incoterms ca baza a contractului lor dar pot prevedea anumite modificari sau adaugiri in functie de natura marfurilor care fac obiectul contractului. Aplicarea Incoterms fiind facultativa este dependenta de vointa partilor; adoptarea de catre ele a conditiilor de livrare reglementate prin aceste uzante nu comporta alte formalitati precizari decat simpla inscriere in contractul de vanzare internationala a clauzei alese, urmata de indicarea denumirii prescurtate a regulii (de ex. F.O.B. Incoterms 1990).
In cazul in care contractantii doresc sa inlocuiasca anumite prevederi din clauza aleasa, ori sa completeze prevederile acestei clauze, vor adauga in continuare formularile convenite.
Incoterms 1953 cuprind 11 tipuri fundamentale de livrare:
1 .Ex works franco fabrica;
2.F.O.R - F.O.T.(free on rail, free on track) - franco vagon sau franco camion (punct de plecare convenit);
3.F.A.S.(free alongside ship) - franco de-a lungul vasului (port de imbarcare convenit);
4F.O.B.(free on board) - franco la bord (bord de incarcare convenit);
5.C and F (cost and freight) cost si navlu (port de destinatie convenit);
6.C.I.F. (cost, insurance, freight) cost, asigurare, navlu (port de destinatie convenit);
7. Freight or Carriage Paid to....Navlu sau porto platit la...(punct de destinatie convenit) conditie care se realizeaza numai pentru transporturi terestre pe trafic intern si international precum si pe caile fluviale navigabile;
8.Ex ship...- pe nava la....(port de destinatie convenit);
9 .Ex quay... -pe chei... (port convenit, vamuit);
10. Delivered at frontier... -livrat la frontiera.... (locul convenit);
11 .Delivered...- livrat... .(loc de destinatie convenit in tara de import).
Adoptarea conditiei de livrare intr-un contract de vanzare internationala presupune luarea in considerare de catre parti a mai multor elemente precum: natura marfii, mijlocul de transport, distanta, calea de transport (aeriana, maritima, terestra).

Despre definirea dreptului comertului international

Caracterele raportului juridic de drept al comertului international
Caracterul comercial si Caracterul international
Caracterul comercial
Raporturile comerciale sunt cele izvorate din acte si fapte de comert. Codul comercial roman foloseste notiunea de "fapte de comert" (art.3-5) in sens larg deoarece cuprinde atat actele juridice cat si faptele stricto-sensu.
In definirea comercialitatii sunt cunoscute urmatoarele conceptii:
• Conceptia subiectiva care are la baza calitatea de comerciant a pers. participante la raportul jd.; (de exemplu dr. german include toate operatiunile efectuate de comerc. in exercitiul profesiei sale).
Ceea ce prevaleaza este numai calit.de comerciant a pers., pentru considerarea actelor subiective de comert.De aceea,intentia sau scopul urmarit prin inche. actelor nu prezinta elevanta.
Conform acestei concepti, calitatea de comerciant a pers. determina o prezumtie legala de comercialitate.
• Conceptia obiectiva, care se bazeaza pe natura operatiunilor indeplinite sau obiectul reglemetarii. Se includ aici operatiunile privind circulatia capitalului (cumpararea si vinzarea comerciala, operatiunile bancare, operatiunile la bursa, opearatiunile de constituire a unei societati comerciale, operatiunile cambiale) si activitatea de productie a intrepriderilor (operatiunile efectuate de intrepriderile de furnituri, de asigurare, constructii si manufactura, editura, spectacole publice, intreprinderile de transport si expeditii, tipografie si librarie etc)
Actele obiective de comert nu sunt definite, gasim doar o enumerare a lor. Astfel Codul comercial roman (care are la baza criteriul obiectiv), in art.3 pct. 1-20 enumera actele si faptele juridice pe care legea le considera ca "fapte de comert". Dat fiind criteriul in temeiul caruia s-au stabilit, acestea sunt denumite fapte de comert obiective. Doctrina romaneasca antebelica precum si cea postbelica au opinat in sensul ca enumerarea din art.3 cod com. are caracter exemplificativ. Acelasi criteriu il regasim si in actele normative ce au functional anterior anului 1990 ( legea de comert exterior -legea nr. 1/1971 care in art.3 al.l stabileste care acte sau fapte sunt considerate operatiuni comerciale internationale. Prevederi similare s-au gasit si in legea contractelor economice nr.71/1969, in art.61.
• o conceptie mixta care combina cele doua criterii subiectiv si obiectiv
Caracterul international
Caracterul international al raporturilor juridice care fac obiectul dreptului comertului international este dat de existenta elementului de extraneitate.
Nu toate raporturile care contin un element strain fac obiectul dreptului acum in studiu. Raportul comercial trebuie sa cuprinda elemente de extraneitate de natura a-1 face susceptibil de incidenta mai multor sisteme de drept.
Identificarea acestor criterii, elemente poate fi facuta fie printr-o conventie internationala fie prin legislatia interna a statului al carui sistem constituie lex causae.
Metodele folosite nu sunt identice cu cele din dreptul international privat. In dreptul roman, atat in conventiile internationale la care Romania este parte cat si in legislatia interna, sint reglementate doua criterii de definire a caracterului international al raporturilor juridice care fac obiectul dreptului comertului international si anume :
- un criteriu de natura subiectiva, ca partile persoane fizice sau juridice, sa aibe domiciliul, respectiv sediul in state diferite si
- un criteriu de natura obiectiva si anume ca marfa, lucrarea sau serviciul sau orice alt bun care face obiectul raportului juridic sa se afle in circuit (tranzit) international, adica, in executarea acelui raport juridic sa treaca cel putin o frontiera.
Reglementarile internationale in care este consacrat criteriul subiectiv sunt:
1. Conv. europeana de arbitraj comercial international, de la Geneva din 1961, care se refera la pers.fz. sau jd. avand " resedinta lor obisnuita sau respectiv sediul in Statele Contractante diferite" ;
2. Conventia de la Washington din 1965 pentru reglementarea diferendelor relative la investitii intre state, care se refera la persoane care poseda "nationalitatea" altui stat (art.25 par.2 lit.a);
3. Conventia Natiunilor Unite asupra contractelor de vinzare internationala de marfuri de la Viena din 1980, care precizeaza ca " se aplica contractelor de vinzare de marfuri intre parti care isi au sediul in state diferite", iar "nationalitatea partilor" este luata in considerare pentru aplicarea conventiei (art.l). Daca o parte nu are sediu, resedinta sa obisnuita ii tine locul (art. 10 lit.b);
4. Conventia asupra prescriptiei in materie de vinzare internationala de marfuri de la New York din 1974, conform caruia "un contract de vanzare de bunuri mobile corporate este considerat ca avand un caracter international daca, in momentul incheierii contractului, vanzatorul si cumparatorul isi au sediul in state diferite ; daca o parte nu are sediu, se va avea in vedere resedinta sa obisnuita". Nationalitatea partilor nu este luata in considerare (art.2)
5. Acordul european ce instituie asocierea dintre Romania pe de o parte si Comunitatea Europeana si statele membre ale acesteia, pe de alta parte, semnat la Bruxelles la 1 februarie 1993. Acesta prevede in art.49 drept criteriu de definire a unei "companii" ca fiind "comunitara" sau "romana", locul unde se afla "sediul inregistrat" alternativ cu cel unde se gaseste "administratia centrala" si cu "locul" principal de afaceri.
In conventiile internationale din domeniul transporturilor intalnim cel de al doilea criteriu -obiectiv- (caracterul international).
Aceste conventii prevad in general, ca este international acel transport in care punctul de plecare si cel de sosire al marfurilor se afla pe teritoriile a doua state diferite.
Asemnea dispozitii gasim in Conventia de la Varsovia de unificare a unor reguli relative la transportul aerian international (art.l); Conventia privind traficul feroviar international de marfuri S.M.G.S. (art.l para.l); Conventia din 1956 referitoare la contractul de transport international pe sosele C.M.R. (art. 1,pet. 1) ; Regulile uniforme din 1980 privind contractul de transport international feroviar al marfurilor -

marți, 19 februarie 2008

Tematica de seminarii

Aceasta este tematica propusa pentru seminarii

Săptămâna I: Introducere in teroria generala a dreptului comertului international. Aspecte organizatorice privind seminarul.

Săptămâna II: Interpretarea conventiilor si tratatelor internationale. Aplicarea prevederilor tratatelor internationale in dreptul romanesc. Aplicabilitatea hotararilor judecatoresti internationale si ale instantelor arbitrale in dreptul national. Relatia intre dreptul roman si dreptul comunitar.

Săptămâna III Introducere in teroria generala a dreptului comertului international. Principiile dreptului comerţului internaţional. Izvoarele dreptului comerţului internaţional.

Săptîmâna IV: Uzanţe comerciale standardizate. Regulile Incoterms; Participanţii la raporturile de comerţ internaţional; Participanţii la raporturile de comerţ internaţional
aparţinând ordinii juridice internaţionale; Participanţii la raporturile de comerţ internaţional aparţinând ordinii juridice interne; Societăţile transnaţionale.

Săptămâna V: Formarea contractului de comerţ internaţional; Demersuri precontractuale; Scrisorile de intenţii; Determinarea condiţiilor generale ale contractului; Legea aplicabila contractului de comert international; Repere ale opţiunii părţilor cu privire la legea contractului; Lex mercatoria universalis; Repere ale opţiunii tribunalului arbitral cu privire la legea contractului;

Săptămâna VI: Contractele internationale. Specific. Trasaturi particulare. Modele. Clauze speciale de reglementare a disputelor.

Săptămâna VII: Contractul internaţional. Clauzele generale ale contractului de comerţ internaţional; Clauze de menţinere a valorii; Clauza ofertei concurente; Clauza clientului cel mai favorizat; Clauza de hardship; Clauza penală; Clauzele limitative de răspundere; Clauza de forţă majoră; Clauze de interpretare; Pactul de preferinţă şi clauza primului refuz; Clauzele specifice ale contractului de comerţ internaţional; Clauza de confidenţialitate; Clauza solve et repete; Clauzele de exclusivitate; Clauzele „best efforts”, „reasonable care”, „due diligence”;

Săptămâna VIII: EVALUAREA CUNOŞTIINŢELOR

Săptămâna IX. CONTRACTUL INTERNATIONAL DE VANZARE DE MARFURI; Vânzarea internaţională de mărfuri. Convenţia de la
Viena din anul 1980; Domeniul de aplicare al Convenţiei de la Viena; Reguli generale privitoare la interpretarea dispoziţiilor Convenţiei;

Săptămâna X. Formarea contractului de vânzare; Conţinutul contractului de vânzare; Jurisprudenţă

Săptămâna XI. Arbitrajul internaţional; Prezentare generală a arbitrajului internaţional; Arbitrajul pe baza normelor de drept şi arbitrajul în echitate; Convenţia de arbitraj; Tribunalul arbitral; Determinarea regulilor aplicabile procedurii
arbitrale;

Săptămâna XII. CONTRACTELE MODERNE DE COMERT INTERNAŢIONAL: contractul internaţional de
cooperare în producţie; contractul internaţional de livrări de mărfuri în contrapartidă (barter); contractul internaţional de antrepriză cu referire specială la montaj industrial; contractele internaţionale de service şi asistenţă tehnică; contractul de export complex; contractul internaţional de leasing; contractul internaţional
de factoring; contractul internaţional de turism; contractele internaţionale de transfer de tehnologie (contractul internaţional de consulting-engineering; contractul internaţional de know-how, contractul internaţional de cesiune de brevet şi de licenţă de brevet, contractul internaţional de franchising); contractul internaţional de publicitate comercială; contractul internaţional de asigurare în comerţul
internaţional;

Săptămâna XIII. Aspecte juridice internationale care faciliteaza schimburile comerciale. Trasportul. Comertul electornic. Fiscalitatea.

Săptămâna XIV. Aspecte internationale privind preluarea si fuziunile de societati. Rolul companiilor multinationale. Negocierea si preluarea companiilor. Aspecte practice. Finalizarea contractelor de achizitie. Particularitati.