• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.39
• /
• pp.3-26
• /
• 2008

CISG provides the Convention's default provisions on anticipatory breach. Article 71 permits the aggrieved party to suspend the performance of his obligations if it becomes apparent that the other party will not perform a substantial part of his obligations after the conclusion of the contract. The aggrieved party must give notice of the suspension to the other party and if he provides adequate assurance of his performance, the party must continue with performance. Article 72 authorizes the aggrieved party to avoid the contract to the date of performance when it is clear that the other party will commit a fundamental breach. The aggrieved party is also required to give the other party notice of his intent to avoid the contract if time allows. The requirements for avoidance under Article 72 are more stringent than those for suspension under Article 71. Article 72 requires reasonable prior notice only if time allows, while article 71 requires immediate notice with no exceptions.

• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.12
• /
• pp.253-276
• /
• 1999

CISG articles 34 and 37 clearly allow the seller to cure any nonconformity in documents of sale or performance prior to the date for delivery if it does not cause the buyer unreasonable inconvenience or unreasonable expense. CISG article 48 allows a seller to cure the performance even after the date for delivery if it does not cause the buyer unreasonable delay, unreasonable inconvenience or unreasonable uncertainty of reimbursement by the seller of expenses advanced by the buyer. The wording any failure to perform is broad enough to include a delay. The seller's right to cure relates to all his obligations. The seller may remedy 'any failure to perform his obligations'. This language is broad enough to include a defect in documents. In some cases the fact that the seller is able and willing to remedy the non-conformity of the goods without inconvenience to the buyer, may mean that there would be no fundamental breach unless the seller failed to remedy the non-conformity within an appropriate time. It cannot generally be said what unreasonable inconvenience means. This can only be decided on a case-by-case basis. The seller must bear the costs involved in remedying a failure to perform. The curing of a failure to perform may have influence on the amount of the damage claimed. Insofar as the seller has the right to cure, the buyer is in that case obliged to accept the cure. If he refuses to do so, he can neither avoid the contract nor declare a reduction in price. This rule clearly shows the underlying concept of the CISG, to keep to the contract, if possible. Should the buyer requires delivery of substitute goods and the seller offers repair, it depends on the expense each case. The buyer must receive the request or notice by the seller. The relationship between the seller's right to cure and the buyer's right to avoid the contract is unclear. The buyer's right to avoid the contract should not nullify the seller's right to cure if the offer is reasonable. In addition, whether a breach is fundamental should be decided in the right of the seller's offer to cure.

• Korean journal of communication and information
• /
• v.66
• /
• pp.242-272
• /
• 2014

This study examines why follow-up investigative programs about the sinking of the Cheonan Patrol Combat Corvette(ROKS Cheonan) have not been produced, despite much speculation surrounding the cause of the sinking since November 2010, when KBS investigative program, In-Depth 60 Minutes which had covered the incident was aired. We have uncovered four reasons through a series of in-depth interviews with producers and reporters, as follows. First, Korean military authorities monopolized relevant information, while the producers could not prove or confirm the validity of the findings of the JIG(Joint Civilian-Military Investigation Group)'s report because the facts had been revealed partially and selectively by the authorities and the press' scientific investigation were rejected by the authorities. Second, the crew of In-Depth 60 Minutes was subjected to severe disciplinary action by the Korea Communications Commission. This caused a chilling effect, - it broke the producers' resolve to further explore the reason behind the sinking. Furthermore, the screening of the investigative documentary, Project Cheonan Ship was cancelled without prior notice, presumably by the power of the State and markets. Third, the reorganization and shake-up of personnel by broadcasting stations' presidents appointed by the power of the State crushed the spirit of PD Journalism. Finally, the "red purge" factions stigmatized by the political or military, or the mainstream press, caused the producers or broadcasters to engage in self-censorship. The idea has been used in Korea as a smoke screen to deflect public attention. Nevertheless, the producers hope to shed light on the Cheonan sinking incident and to prove reasonable doubts by pursuing follow-up investigations.