A Comparative Analysis on the Methods of Quantifying Damages - Focused on the CISG -

손해배상액(損害賠償額) 산정방식(算定方式)에 관한 비교연구(比較硏究) - CISG를 중심으로 -

There are two methods of quantifying the damages when the contract is avoided. One is 'concret' assessment, the other is 'abstract' assessment. The former looks to the actual cost incurred by the aggrieved party in concluding a contract for the substitute transaction, while the latter is based on the market price. The concrete method of assessment forms the starting point in the Civil Law systems. In the Common Law systems, it is likewise available. The aggrieved party is entitled to recover the difference between the cost of cover or (as the case may be) the proceeds of resale and the contract price. Both systems also recognize the abstract method of assessment. If the aggrieved party does not resell or cover, damages are equal to the difference between the price fixed by the contract and the market price. The CISG and the UNIDROIT Principles recognize expressly both concrete and abstract methods. Under the relevant articles, the aggrieved party can recover the damages assessed by one of the methods as well as any further damages such as loss of profit, incidental and consequential damages.