• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제31권
• /
• pp.3-25
• /
• 2006

This study focus on interest for arrears and filling of the gaps left in Article 78 of CISG. In the case of CISG, Article 78 provides for interest any time a payment under a contract is untimely, but does not specify a particular rate of interest or a method to determine such a rate. This issue did not cause any uncertainty under ULIS, the CISG's antecedent, since Article 83 of ULIS provided for 1%p above the official discount rate in the creditor's country. Lacking any CISG general principle as well as any indication by the very same CISG, one can only conclude that the matter must be deferred to the domestic rule of private international law. Actually, resorting to private international law is not only admissible, but expressly required by Article 7(2). In the interpretation and filling of the gaps left in Article 78, there is a considerable difference of opinion especially amongst commentators on whether the gap is a lacuna praeter legem, i.e., one being governed by, but not expressly settled in the CISG, or whether it is an issue falling outside the scope of application of the CISG, i.e. a lacuna intra legem. The protagonists of the former view lay emphasis on the overall objective of the CISG, namely to create a uniform law, whereas the supporters of the latter view refer to the legislative history of Article 78 as the dominant principle in interpreting Article 78. Some authors believe that the issue of determining the rate of interest is not dealt with by CISG and it is, therefore, governed by the applicable domestic law, which is the subsidiary law applicable to the sales contract, since "no special connecting points seem to have developed for the entitlement to interest." In the light of the relevant case law, it seems correct to conclude that the interest rate is not determined by CISG and that courts normally determine it according to their own rules of private international law. While CISG Article 78 expressly does not deal with this issue, PICC Article 7.4.9 and PECL Article 9.508, on the other hand, set forth a precise method for computing interest. Although a method like the one set by PICC may be useful and may encourage uniformity, it still cannot be used under the CISG. The PICC or PECL formula may, however, be a very good starting point in a de jure condendum analysis when a new Article 78 will be drafted, if an interest rate method will ever be embodied in the text of an international convention.

• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제13권
• /
• pp.235-253
• /
• 2000

As to the sphere of application, Article 78 CISG undoubtedly applies to interest on the purchase price. Furthermore, the provision also applies to "any other sum that is in arrears". This language has been interpreted to encompass expenses that one party had on behalf of the other as well as reimbursements when the purchase price is reduced according to Article 50 CISG. However, it is questionable whether this language also extends to claims for damages. Legal scholars seem to agree that one has a right to interest on damage claims under Article 78 if the amount in question has been liquidated vis-a-vis the other party. Whether this right to interest also applies to unliquidated sums, is controversial, however. In this study, as a result of taking into account the puspose of Article 78, we could find the fact that regardless of whether the exact amount of damages has been specified yet, the breaching party still owes compensation to the other party from the time of the breach and, accordingly, the non-breaching party should be entitled to interest payments on the loss from that time. Consequently, Article 78 applies not only to liquidated but also to unliquidated damages.

• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제55권
• /
• pp.3-32
• /
• 2012

CISG article 74 establishes the general formula applicable in all cases where an aggrieved party is entitled to recover damages. It provides that damages for breach of contract comprise all losses, including loss of profits, caused by the breach, to the extent that these losses were foreseeable by the breaching party at the time the contract was concluded. An aggrieved party may claim under article 74 even if entitled to claim under article 75 or 76. The latter articles explicitly provide that an aggrieved party may recover additional damages under article 74. Articles 75 and 76 apply only in cases where the contract has been avoided. Article 75 measures damages concretely by reference to the price in a substitute transactions, while article 76 measures damages abstractly by reference to the current market price. Article 76 (1) provides that an aggrieved party may not calculate damages under article 76 if it has concluded a substitute transaction under article 75. If however, an aggrieved party concludes a substitute transaction for less than the contract quantity, both articles 75 and 76 may apply. Pursuant to article 77, damages recoverable under articles 74, 75 or 76 are reduced if it is established that the aggrieved party failed to mitigate losses. The reduction is the amount by which the loss should have been mitigated. Article 78 entitles a party to interest on the price and any other sum that is in arrears.

• 통상정보연구
• /
• 제15권3호
• /
• pp.199-224
• /
• 2013

본고의 연구범위로서 '국제물품매매계약에 관한 UN협약'(CISG) 제3편 제3장 제1절은 총 7개의 조문으로 구성되어 있다. 본고의 연구결과로서 개별조항의 법적 기준에 관한 요지와 그 시사점 내지 유의점은 다음과 같다. 제53조는 본절의 개요임과 동시에 매수인의 주된 의무를 일괄하여 다루고 있는 규정이다. 본조는 CISG가 물품매매의 요건을 언급하고 있지 않음을 고려하여 제30조와 연계하여 다루어야 한다. 제54조는 계약이나 또는 적용법규에 따라 물품대금지급을 위한 매수인의 준비조치를 다루고 있는 규정으로서 본조의 의무를 위반할 경우 매도인은 제61조에 따라 구제수단을 행사할 수 있다. 다만 이러한 절차는 제71조 (1)에서 규정하고 있는 이행준비 또는 계약의 이행을 위한 행위가 아님을 유의하여야 한다. 제55조는 적용함에 있어서는 반드시 양당사자의 의사가 고려되어야 한다. 계약당사자가 물품가격을 결정하고 있는 경우 제7조의 적용순위에 따라 일반원칙 내지 국제사법이 적용될 수 있음을 유의하여야 한다. 제56조는 당사자가 물품중량의 기준을 합의해 두고 있지 않다면 포장중량을 제외한 물품의 순중량으로 물품대금을 결정하도록 규정하고 있다. 본조는 당사자 의사나 관행 또는 관습이 없는 경우에 적용되는 일반원칙이다. 제57조에 의거 당사자가 달리 합의한 바가 없다면 물품대금은 매도인의 영업소에서, 당사자가 물품의 인도 또는 서류의 교부 시에 대금을 지급하기로 합의한 경우 물품 또는 서류가 인도되는 장소에서 대금이 지급되어야 한다. 계약체결 후 영업소의 변경과 관련하여 발생한 물품대금지급에 관한 추가비용은 매도인이 부담하여야 한다. 제58조는 그 어떠한 특정한 시기에 물품대금을 지급하여야 할 의무가 없는 경우 매수인의 대금지급의 시기를 규정하고 있는 조문으로서 이 경우 본조는 제78조에 언급된 이자의 누적의 시기의 기산시점이 된다. 제59조에 따라 매수인은 그 어떠한 조건에도 구애됨이 없이 예정대로 물품대금을 지급하여야 한다. 당해 의무를 위반할 경우 매도인은 모든 구제권을 행사할 수 있다. 당해 시점 이후로 연체된 금액의 이자가 적용된다.