• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제12권
• /
• pp.277-293
• /
• 1999

As the CISG has been legislated for a new legal system playing roles as uniform rules which govern international sale of goods, it requires appropriate criterion of interpretation. The Convention distinguishes between two levels of interpretation. One concerns the interpretation of the rules of contract law contained in the CISG itself, and the other the interpretation of specific statements or the conduct of the individual parties to a transaction.

• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제49권
• /
• pp.43-59
• /
• 2011

Incoterms 2010 have been revised in line with the latest changes in contemporary commercial practice. An understanding of Incoterms 2010 is essential. The Incoterms rules on the use of domestic and international trade terms, facilitate the conduct of global trade. Reference to an Incoterms 2010 rule in a sale contract clearly defines the parties' respective obligations and reduces the risk of legal complications. In 1980 the United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods(CISG) was introduced to create international certainty and uniformity in the law and to govern issues that arise in an international sale of goods transaction. This paper focuses on harmony and ability of the CISG and Incoterms 2010 to govern contracts for the sale of goods.

• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제60권
• /
• pp.3-26
• /
• 2013

Seller's obligation on the Delivery of Goods and Handing over the Documents are key elements in Contracts for the International Sale of Goods. The United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods(CISG) has been entered into force on 1 January 1988 to create international certainty and uniformity in the law and to govern issues that arise in an international sale of goods transaction. The Incoterms were first published by the ICC in 1936 and were most recently revised in 2010. Incoterms 2010 are entering into force on 1 January 2011. The Incoterms focus on the seller's delivery obligations and reflect the principle that the risk of loss or damage to the goods passes from the seller to the buyer when the seller has fulfilled its obligations to deliver the goods. This study highlights basic rules covering seller's obligation of delivery of goods and handing over the documents under the Incoterms 2010 and the United Nations Convention and Contracts for the International Sale of Goods. In the second chapter, this study will provide analyses and compare these two legal systems in relation to the basic rules governing delivery of goods and passing of risks in contract of sale. This chapter evaluates the meaning of Article 31 and Article 67(1) and FOB, CFR, CIF & FCA, CPT, CIP terms of Incoterms 2010. Chapter Three will focus on handing over the documents. Article 30 CISG imposes the seller's primary obligations to deliver the goods and to hand over documents relating to them. Article 34 CISG supplements the seller's obligation in relation to documents by providing that the seller must hand over documents relating to the goods. In contrast, Article 58(1) CISG imposes on the buyer the obligation to pay only when it has received the goods or documents controlling their disposition. I reviewed only some of the documents relating to the goods are documents controlling their disposition. This chapter considers the meaning of the phrase "documents that control the disposition of the goods and do not control disposition of the goods." Finally, the fourth chapter will assess the meaning of rules of CISG and Incoterms 2010.

• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제51권
• /
• pp.79-99
• /
• 2011

This study describes the seller's duty to deliver the goods in conformity with the contract. The purpose of this study is twofold: to analyze the seller's principal duty, comparing the United Nations Convention on the International Sale of Goods(CISG) with Sale of Goods Act(SGA) and to provide legal and practical advice to contracting parties who consider CISG or SGA as a governing law. This paper first considers the requirements for the conformity with the contract, which means contractual requirements agreed between parties and implied requirements not agreed between parties. Following this, the exclusion of the seller's duty to deliver the goods required by the contract is described. Finally, this paper ends up giving contracting parties legal and practical advice.

• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제60권
• /
• pp.27-46
• /
• 2013

The Incoterms and United Nations Convention on Contract for the international Sales of Goods(CISG) allocate a risk in their articles. These rules make a decision that the parties who make a transaction are bound to bear the risk or damages of goods. Though a goods have a damages or loss during a transportation, buyer is liable for the payment of purchase price. In this case, this paper defines the meaning whether who can bear the risk under Incoterms and CISG. In the majority cases which deal between parties, after shipment or at the end of carriage, the loss or damages are found in buyer's hand. If a damages or loss is made during transit, customarily these risk are covered by insurance. Otherwise, these rules provide a tools for solving this problems. Then, between parties should be accomplished their target equitably.

• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제53권
• /
• pp.31-48
• /
• 2012

If see CISG's passing of risk and altered regulations first, when sales contract accompanies transport of goods and seller does not have duty to deliver goods at particular place, when deliver to the first carter to send to purchaser according to sales contract risk passes to purchaser, and when there is duty that seller must deliver goods to carter at specification place, when goods are delivered to carter at same place, risk does not pass to purchaser. Second, risk about transporting goods passes to purchaser at signing a contract. But, when there is special assessment, risk passes to purchaser when goods are delivered to carter who publish document that embody contract of carriage. Nevertheless, it is loss if seller did not notify this truth to occasion purchaser who could knew loss or damage of goods or know justly at sales contract conclusion defamation danger seller of be burdensome. Third, seller has responsibility about damage or loss as long as hide in own artificiality or forbearance after risk passes to purchaser. Regulation about risk in Incoterms 2010 was separated into 11 condition, and move time of risk differs in angle condition. It is appeared that the substance handles relatively comprehensively because compare in Incoterms 2010 although it is because it becomes if it examines regulation about deliver and passing of risk of goods setting in CISG relatively concise. Also, segments that can become posibility of analysis controversy exist.

• 무역학회지
• /
• 제41권5호
• /
• pp.15-39
• /
• 2016

본 연구는 국제무역거래의 법적 뒷받침인 상관습법을 알아보고 어떻게 상관습법이 국제무역거래에서 영향력을 행사하는지를 알아보고자 하였다. 또한 상관습법은 크게 국제 협약, 모델법, 국제규칙으로 구분됨을 밝히고 국제물품매매계약의 대표적인 국제협약인 국제물품매매계약유엔협약(일명 'CISG')과 국제상사계약에 관한 UNIDROIT 원칙(일명 'PICC 원칙')을 적용 범위와 해석 원칙에 근거하여 살펴보았다. 논의 결과, 먼저 CISG는 국제물품매매계약의 통일과 조화를 위하여 기획된 제정법이며 PICC 원칙은 국제규칙에 불과한 것으로 파악되었다. 둘째, CISG와 PICC 원칙은 모두 양당사자의 의사 합의를 존중하였으며 합의에 의해 명시적으로 배제 가능하다. 셋째, CISG는 모든 나라가 가입이나 비준한 것은 아니기 때문에 CISG 적용상 지역적 불균형이 있다. 또한 CISG 체약국이더라도 각 국가의 국내법과 연결 정도에 따라 적용상의 차이가 있다. 지금 미국의 법에서는 약인이론, 사기방지법, 구두증거배제의 원칙이 있지만 CISG는 이런 규정이 없다. PICC 원칙은 계약에 준거법으로 활용되는 것이 아니라 계약의 준거법에 보충하거나 해석 시 고려되는 원칙에 불과하지만 향후에는 소송보다는 중재가 더욱 선호되는 것임을 감안하면 중재판정부에 의한 계약의 준거법 해석에 보완하는 역할로 더욱 힘을 발휘할 것으로 판단된다.

• 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.

• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제71권
• /
• pp.1-36
• /
• 2016

Unlike continental European legal systems (civil law systems), specific performance in common law refers to an equitable remedy requiring exactly the performance that was specified in a contract. It usually granted only when money damages would be an inadequate remedy and the subject matter of the contract is unique. Thus, under common law specific performance was not a remedy, with the rights of a litigant being limited to the collection of damages. Consistent with the practice in civil law jurisdictions, United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods (CISG) makes specific performance the normal remedy for breach of a contract for the sale of goods. Therefore, the buyer may require a breaching seller to deliver substitute goods or to make any reasonable repair. Likewise, the sellermay require the buyer to taker delivery of goods and pay for them. Despite this, Article 28 of the CISG restricts the availability of specific performance where it would be unavailable under the domestic law of the jurisdiction in which the court is located. Thus, the CISG's more liberal policy toward specific performance is restricted by common law. There are some legal issues in CISG's specific performance availability by Article 28. This paper analyzes these issues as interpreting Article 28 of CISG, by examining various theories of application to actions for specific performance and comparing CLOUT cases involving CISG Article 28.

• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제12권
• /
• pp.65-84
• /
• 1999

During the past few decades, we have witnessed three approaches to overcome the legal disparities between trading countries: - determining the individual governing law in accordance with the conflict of laws principle; - unifying and harmonizing private international law into uniform rules and substantive laws under the auspices of ICC, UNCITRAL, UNIDROIT and various NGOs ; and - drafting model laws like the UNCITRAL Model Law on Electronic Commerce and promoting member countries to enact them. Against this backdrop, the United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods (CISG) and the process by which it was adopted, established the benchmark for the unification of commercial law. The CISG, completed in 1980, merged civil and common law concepts and came into force in 1988 after a certain number of countries endorsed the treaty. Besides the CISG, the U.N. Limitations Convention and the UNIDROIT Principles of International Commercial Law, to name a few, have attempted to set cross-border legal norms and standards in the international business transactions. However, since the advent of computer-based commerce, there have emerged all-out efforts to establish uniform rules before national legal systems have been developed. As a consequence, the Model Law on Electronic Commerce has become a specimen legislation covering functional equivalents of paper-based writing and signature. For the credit enhancement exemplified by the Uniform Rules for Demand Guarantees (ICC Publication No.458), the UNCITRAL prepared the U.N. Convention on Independent Guarantees and Stand-by Letters of Credit, which was adopted by the U.N. General Assembly in 1995 but remains still not effective as only two countries have ratified this treaty so far. In this connection, two draft conventions underway at UNIDROIT and UNCITRAL deserve our attention as the probability of unification in the Korean Peninsula is mounting. They are to create security interests for commercial finance in moveable equipment and accounts receivable. The UCC-type security rights are regarded to be useful to enable the North Koreans with limited properties to borrow from the banks.