• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.69
• /
• pp.179-199
• /
• 2016

There is legal relation between both parties after contract formation. The parties are liable for performing each duties but a party is not liable for a failure to perform the duties if party proves that the failure was due to the force majeure. The forec majeure has different concepts and legal principles such as change circumstance, hardship, frustration, impediment and so on. Therefore, it need to analyze a historical background and their presence in various domestic legal systems. Although the CISG describes Art. 79 impediment instead of using the force majeure, the impediment has several interpretative limitation. The CISG pursue to harmonize divergent legal concepts and principles from various national laws and legal systems but the harmonization of legal systems make the impediment more confused. The article goes on to analyzes about limitation of the impediment and reviews to examine the force majeure and hardship in PICC. Thus both parties of international contract insert hardship clause in order to prevent the problem of judgment in a court or a court of arbitration under impediment of CISG.

• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.36
• /
• pp.3-26
• /
• 2007

This article attempts to describe and analyze discussions on the matter of ex tunc effect or a ex nunc effect of rescission under Korean law in comparison with those under the CISG). In addition, it tries to scrutinize the various rules on the right to damages as an effect of rescission in a comparative way. Furthermore, it compares the various rules of Korean law with the CISG as to the right to damages and evaluates them in light of the discipline of comparative law. It maintains that the liquidation theory in Korean law is more close to the CISG in that there is no ex tunc effect in rescission and in other aspects. It also argues that the construction of the effects of rescission in accordance with the liquidation theory is more plausible when one considers Korea is one of the contracting states of the CISG. In addition, the theoretical analysis and the comparative study with the CISG shows that the insistence of ex nunc effect and its interpretation on the scope of damages extends to damages for expectation interest. It is also submitted that the position under the CISG on the assumption of ex nnuc effect, is regretted in that the restitution in value of the goods in the event of impossibility of the physical restitution is not allowed in some cases which the damage claims can not be awarded for the seller due to the application of the CISG Art. 79.

• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.18 no.1
• /
• pp.49-69
• /
• 2008

This study is to analyze the case law on the disputes of the ex-im contract of steel bar from Yugoslav to Egypt, for which awards were made by the ICC Arbitration Court, trying to find out the characteristic approach of the tribunal toward arbitration case dealing with socialistic country, Yugoslav and Islamic Egypt. An Egyptian importer and an Yugoslavian Exporter concluded a contract, with an option to purchase an additional quantity. for the steel bar. The importer exercised this option as provided in the contract. But the exporter refused to honor the option, due to the fact that the world market price for the steel bar has gone up. As a result, the importer had to purchase the steel bar as a replacement from a Rumanian company at the price higher than the original contract. And it has initiated arbitration under the arbitration clause at the ICC Arbitration Court to claim compensation for the loss due to the price difference. CISG and ULIS were closely studied along with the Yugoslav Law to determine whether the exporter could be exempted from the liability to damages. But the tribunal denied to accept the exporter's contention. The tribunal decided that the importer was entitled to damages due to the exporter's failure to deliver the additional quantity of goods at the original price. It was due to the fact that the price increase was not extremely sudden & high enough to exceed a reasonable entrepreneurial risk and also could be taken into account when concluding the contract.