• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제55권
• /
• pp.95-124
• /
• 2012

Referring to Buyer's obligations, the Buyer must pay the price for the goods and take delivery of them as required by the contract. There are vital importances to the Buyer's Fundamental Breach. The legal effects of a breach of contract do not depend on the nature of the obligation broken, but on the consequences of the breach the detriment to the other party. The obligations mentioned to Article 53 are primary obligations which are to be fulfilled in the normal performance of the contract. They include a number of different acts which could be seen as the subject-matter of different obligations. CISG gives further details for the payment of the price in Articles 54 to 59 and for taking delivery in Article 60. The buyer has to take delivery at the respective place within a reasonable period after this communication since he cannot be required to take delivery immediately. Refusing to take delivery in case of delay not constituting a ground for avoiding the contract makes no sense, since this would lead to even later delivery. For the understanding of Buyer's Fundamental Breach, We need to search the Cases referring to the breach of buyer's main obligations.

• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제64권
• /
• pp.3-37
• /
• 2014

The purpose of this paper is to examine thoroughly on passing of risk in contracts for the international sale of goods. Articles 66~70 of the CISG contain provisions on passing of risk. Article 66 states the main effect of passing risk to the buyer. Article 67~69 determine the decisive point in time which the risk passes from the seller to the buyer and article 70 attempts to explain the relation between passing of risk and fundamental breach of contract by the seller. As in the case corresponding Incoterms rules, the main issue to be resolved is which party should bear the economic consequences in the event that the goods are accidentally lost, damages or destroyed. Many cases also apply CISG articles 66~70 to contracts in which parties not agree on the use of trade terms such as CIF, CFR, FOB and FCA in Incoterms[R] 2010 Rule that provide for when the risk passes. In order to minimize disputes that may arise under contract, when drawing up a contracts for the international sale of goods, the specifics of agreement should be clearly stipulated. Consequently, the parties of contracts for the international sale of goods should take adequate measures, and it is required to prepare the contracts clearly as the specific terms to prevent and resolve contractual disputes on passing of risk.

• 무역학회지
• /
• 제48권3호
• /
• pp.23-41
• /
• 2023

무역계약의 이행기일은 매도인의 물품인도 기일과 매수인의 대금지급 기일이다. 신용장거래에서 무역계약의 이행기일은 신용장에서 명시된 선적기일과 서류매입기일로 본다. 매도인은 매수인으로부터 신용장을 받고나서 5 은행영업일 이내에 신용장의 승낙 여부를 결정하여야 하며 이 기간이 경과하면 매도인은 신용장을 거절할 수 없다. 그러나 매수인의 귀책 사유로 인하여 5 은행영업일 이내에 신용장의 승낙 여부를 결정하지 못하는 경우에는 신용장에 명시된 선적기일까지 연장된다. 매도인이 신용장 변경을 요청한 경우에 매수인은 반드시 이를 수락하여 매도인이 원하는 신용장을 변경하여 매도인에게 개설하여야 한다. 매수인이 매도인의 신용장 변경 요청을 거절하면 A사는 B사가 요청한 대로 신용장 내용을 변경하여 다시 개설할 의무가 있고 A사가 단순히 신용장의 변경을 지체한 것이 아니라 B사의 신용장 요청을 거절한 경우에는 B사가 견적서에 합의하여 기대할 수 있는 바를 실질적으로 박탈하는 것으로 국제물품매매계약에 관한 국제연합협약 제25조가 규정한 본질적인 계약위반에 해당되어 B사는 무역계약을 해제할 수 있고 A사에게 손해배상을 청구할 수 있다. A사의 무역계약 위반으로 인한 손해배상액은 이익의 상실을 포함하여 그 위반의 결과 B사가 입은 손실과 동등한 금액으로 하여야 한다.

• 한국컴퓨터정보학회논문지
• /
• 제6권4호
• /
• pp.188-205
• /
• 2001

보험자의 고지의무는 최대선의원칙의 상호성에 그 바탕을 둔 것으로서 최근에 들어와 영미보험법계에서 널리 인정되고 있는 추세이다. 보험자 고지의무의 위반효과로서 전통적인 구제수단인 보험계약 해지(취소)와 기납입 보험료의 반환만을 인정한다면 보험계약자를 적절히 보호해 주지 못하는 경우가 발생할 수 있으며, 이를 위해 보험 계약자에게 손해배상 청구를 인정하는 문제가 논의되고 있다. 일부 영미법계 국가의 법원에선 이를 이미 승인하고 있는데 그 법률적 기초를 제공하는 것이 바로 신뢰관계 이론이다. 신뢰관계의 개념은 이제 더 이상 형평법이나 영미법계의 국가만의 법 이론이 아니다. 따라서 어느 영역에서보다도 공공의 이익(public interest)과 밀접한 관계가 있는 보험계약의 본질로서 신뢰관계를 인정하는 것은 공평 타당한 보험계약 당사자 관계를 추구하는 하나의 효율적인 방안이 될 것이며, 이는 보험자 고지위반 효과로서 손해배상 청구를 인정하는 법률적 기초를 제공할 수 있게 된다. 앞으로 우리나라 보험산업에서도 보험계약의 본질로서의 신뢰관계를 인정해야만 보험 산업의 경영실적과 질적 수준을 높이게 된다고 본다. 따라서 이와 같은 신뢰관계를 잘 유지하는 것, 즉 신뢰관계 유지율을 높이는 것이 보험산업에 있어서의 관건이 된다고 본다. 신뢰 관계 유지율은 우리나라에서는 금액비교식을, 미국에서는 건수비교식을 사용하여 계산하고 있다. 그런데 보유계약의 건별 금액이 차이가 있어 상호 절대 비교가 불가능하고, 월별 회차별로 나타내기 때문에 회사전체의 보유계약의 유지상태의 실력을 알아 볼 수 없다는 한계가 있다. 본 연구에서는 보험계약의 본질로서 신뢰관계를 인정하고 보험회사전체의 보유계약의 유지상태의 실력을 알아 볼 수 있는 새로운 신뢰관계 유지율을 개발하여 보험회사의 내실 (질)있는 성장을 추구하는 포괄적 실력평가 기준을 제시하였다. 즉, 기준시점의 보험계약 각 각을 기초로 하여 납기월수 대비 통상 유지된 계약의 개월 수로 표시한 건수비교식 신뢰관 계 유지율이라고 하는 것을 개발하였다. 이 포괄적 실력 평가 기준인 신뢰관계 유지율은 해당 보험회사가 얼마나 재무구조가 튼튼하고 또한 얼마나 값싼 보험료를 책정할 수 있는가를 나타내며, 건수비교식 신뢰관계 유지율을 이용하여 A손해보험회사의 실력을 평가 분석하였다. 보험회사의 실력을 평가 분석해 본 결과 나타난 신뢰관계 유지율의 악화는 신계약제일의 외형성장위주의 정책이 낳은 결과이며, 질적성장보다는 양적인 신계약위주의 영업에 치중함으로 말미암아 고비용 저효율의 악순환을 거듭하여 왔음을 알 수 있었다. 본 연구에서는 외형성장위주의(시장점유율 확대)경영 정책인 고비용 저효율의 악순환 구조에서 벗어나기 위한 개선방안으로 내실위주의 경영정책인 저비용 고효율의 수익 극대화 구조인 새로운 비즈니스 모델을 개발하였다.

• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제69권
• /
• pp.107-126
• /
• 2016

The parties in International Sale of Goods including Korean Firms Should note ; The buyer must pay the price for the goods and take delivery of them as required by the contract and CISG. The obligations mentioned in Article 53 are primary obligations which are to be fulfilled in the normal performance of the contract. The buyer has to take delivery at the respective place within a reasonable period after this communication since he cannot be required to take delivery immediately. Refusing to take delivery in case of delay not constituting a ground for avoiding the contract makes no sense, since this would lead to even later delivery. The buyer's obligation to pay the price includes taking such steps and complying with such formalities as may be required under the contract or any laws and regulations to enable payment to be made. International sales contracts frequently prescribe that the buyer has to act in advance, that is before the seller starts the process of delivery. Such acts may be either advance payments or the procurement of securities for payment as letters of credit guarantees. On the other hand, The seller deliver the goods hand over any documents relating to them and transfer the property in the goods, as required by the contract and CISG. The seller must deliver goods which are of the quantity, quality and description required by the contract and which are contained or packaged in the manner required by the contract. Except where the parties have agreed otherwise, the goods do not conform with the contract unless they are fit for the purposes for which goods of the same description would ordinarily be used are fit for any particular purpose expressly or impliedly made known to the seller at the time of the conclusion of the contract, except where the circumstances show that the buyer did not rely, or that it was unreasonable for him to rely, on the seller's skill and judgement. The buyer may declare the contract avoided if the failure by the seller to perform any of his obligations under the contract or CISG amounts to a fundamental breach of contract. The seller may declare the contract avoided if the failure by the buyer to perform any of his obligations under the contract or CISG amounts to a fundamental breach of contract.

• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제51권
• /
• pp.187-210
• /
• 2011

International transactions have the threat of non-payment by the buyer or non-performance by the seller. Parties tend to search for additional means of securing performance and payment beyond the mere agreement in the contract. Such security may be achieved by means of a letter of credit. When contracting parties have agreed to pay by means of a letter of credit, the buyer's bank takes upon itself the obligation to pay the purchase price when the seller tenders the documents that are stipulated in the letter of credit. The documents must comply strictly with the terms of the credit.. The documents play a crucial role in letter of credit transaction. The principles of abstraction, separability and strict compliance governing the letter of credit transaction are considered. The concept of fundamental breach of Article 25 CISG was discussed. This article examines whether a failure to deliver documents conforming to the terms of the letter of credit can constitute a fundamental breach of the sales contract as defined by Article 25 of the CISG by the seller and thereby enable the buyer to avoid the contract. For letter of credit transactions it should be accepted that the delivery of non-performing documents constitutes a fundamental breach, if the result of this breach is that the bank refuses to pay the price for the goods. On the other hand, in the interpretation of Article 25 CISG, it should be noted that if the parties have agreed to payment by means of a letter of credit, they have simultaneously agreed to apply the strict compliance principle to the delivery of documents in the sales contract. Finally the parties should ensure that inconsistency between the requirements under the documentary credit and the requirements under the contract of sale is avoided, since the buyer may be in breach of his payment obligation if the seller cannot get paid under the documentary credit when his documents conform with the contract of sale.

• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제70권
• /
• pp.39-65
• /
• 2016

On 2013 the English court delivered a decision that the payment obligation under time charter party is a condition. According to this judgement, The Astra, a breach of the obligation to pay hire on time entitles the owner both to withdraw the ship and sue the charterers for damages for the difference between the contract and market rate for the remainder of the contracted period. On 2015, however, the English court stood at the other side. In Spar Shipping, the court confirmed that the obligation to pay hire is not a condition of the contract but an "innominate term" - from the charterers' breach ship owners can exercise their contractual right to withdraw, but owners' right to sue for damages depends on whether the charterers have deprived the owners of the substantial benefit of the contract, or shown an intention to do so. This article aims to compare both decisions over the points that (1) the importance of on-time payment under a time charter party, (2) as a critical and main question in this article, whether the mattered payment clause is a condition or innominate term, (3) whether the on-time payment clause is merely a penalty or a reasonable liquidated damage. Based on various reasons, I am on a position that the payment of hire is not a condition but an innominate term. Default in punctual payment by a charterer, in the absent of clear contractual agreement, needs to be decided further whether that breach removes the substantial benefit of the contract from the owners.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제24권4호
• /
• pp.147-175
• /
• 2014

In contracts for the international sale of goods, a seller must deliver appropriate goods and hand over relevant documents according to a contract, which will transfer the ownership of the goods to a buyer. In this case, if there are defects in the contracted goods, the warranty liability will occur. However, in the United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods (CISG), a term-the conformity of the goods to the contract-is used universally instead of the warranty. According to the CISG, a seller must deliver goods in conformance with the relevant contract in terms of quantity, quality, and specifications, and they must be contained in vessels or in packages according to the specifications in the contract. In addition, a certain set of requirements for conformity will be applied implicitly except when there is a separate agreement between parties. Further, the base period of conformity concerning the defects of goods is the point when the risk is transferred to the buyer. A seller shall be obliged to deliver goods that do not belong to a third party or subject to a claim then, and such obligations shall affect the right or claim of a third party to some extent based on intellectual property rights clauses. If the goods delivered by the seller lack conformity, or incur right infringement or claim of a third party, then it shall be regarded as a default item per the obligation of the seller. Thus, the buyer can exercise diverse means of relief as specified in Chapter 2, Section 3 (Article 45-Article 52) of the CISG. However, such means of relief have been utilized in various ways for individual cases as shown in judicial precedents made until now. Contracting parties shall thus keep in mind that it is best for them to make every contract airtight and they should implement each contract thoroughly and faithfully to cope with any possible occurrence of a commercial dispute.