• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제58권
• /
• pp.35-58
• /
• 2013

In Mash & Murrell, Diplock J said that "there is an implied warranty not merely that they shall be merchantable at the time they are put on the vessel, but that they shall be in such a state that they can endure the normal journey and be in a merchantable condition upon arrival." But in The Mercini Lady, Field J said that "the goods would be of satisfactory quality not only when the goods were delivered on to the vessel but also for a reasonable time thereafter." and "The proposed conditions were not excluded by clause 18. ${\cdots}$ clause 18 was not to be construed as extending to conditions ${\cdots}$". In relation to the problems on validity of the goods conformity clauses in FOB contracts, when considering Lord Wright's comments ("${\cdots}$ hence apt and precise words must be used to exclude it: the words guarantee or warranty are not sufficiently clear.") in Cammell Laird & Co Ltd v Manganese Bronze and Brass, FOB contracts are fundamentally one that seller's duty to deliver the goods is completing at the port of shipment and "principle of party autonomy" in Contract Law, I do not think that the terms implied by section 14 of the SGA and Common Law cannot absolutely excluded by the goods conformity clauses in sale contracts. Therefore, in order to exclude the implied terms, the parties must very clearly spell out this in the relevant clauses.

• 정보학연구
• /
• 제7권3호
• /
• pp.83-98
• /
• 2004

본 연구는 최근 컴퓨터사용의 보편화와 정보통신기술이 발달로 급속히 진전되어 가고 있는 전자무역거래의 전분야 중에서 컴퓨터 On-Line(E-mail과 WWW 등)을 통한 전자무역계약의 성립법리과 UCC를 중심으로 한 전자무역계약의 성립요건을 살펴보고 일본법과 UNCITRAL Law, 그리고 EU지령 등을 중심으로 전자무역계약의 성립시기와 그 계약의 휴요성을 구체적으로 제시함으로써 인터넷시대에 대응한 전자무역계약성립에 대한 명확한 이론정립에 도움을 주고자함을 목적으로 한다.

• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제69권
• /
• pp.85-105
• /
• 2016

The fact that one of the parties to the sale contract has had to pay demurrage to the shipowner under LD clauses in the charterparty does not of itself mean that he can recover that loss from his sale counter party under the sale contract: the route to such recovery is through express clauses in the sale contract itself. LD clauses in a sale contract stand free and independent of their counterparts in the relevant charterparty. LD clauses in a sale contract should be construed and applied as clauses in sale contracts, not as adjuncts to charterparties. Their interpretation should therefore be coloured not by decisions on laytime and demurrage in charterparties, but by their relationship to the contractual duties of CIF and FOB sellers and buyers. The results discussed here have implications for the drafting of LD clauses in sale contracts. If unwelcome surprises are to be avoided, it seems to advisable to start from the principle: what exactly do traders want or need in LD clauses. They need a clause which covers them against charterparty losses where those losses are the result of dealy caused by the counterparty to the sale contract. The parties to the sale contracts are well advised to prepare LD clauses concentrating on that purpose and bearing in mind the followiing questions. First, should the loading and discharge code in the sale contract appear in traders' or trade associations' standard terms and conditions or should they be left to ad hoc negotiation in contract sheets? Second, should that code be as complete as possible, covering loading or discharge periods or rates, demurrage and despatch, or is it enough for only some of those matters to be covered explicitly, leaving other matters to be governed" as per charterparty"? Third, does the introduction or incorporation of a stipulation for the giving of a notice of readiness make the start of laytime more or less predictable as between seller and buyer? Finally should a loading and discharge code in a sale contract actully be called a "laytime and demmurrage clauses"?

• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제2권
• /
• pp.45-62
• /
• 1991

• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제9권
• /
• pp.45-82
• /
• 1996

• 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
• /
• 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
• /
• 제12권
• /
• pp.227-252
• /
• 1999

In this Article the writer introduces the origin and preparation of "the UNIDROIT Principles of International Commercial Contracts". In May 1994 the Governing Council of the UNIDROIT gave its formal imprimatur to the UNIDROIT Principles and recommended their widest possible distribution in practice. After brief discussion of the establishment procedure of the UNIDROIT Principles the writer discusses the legal nature of the Principles as an international restatement of contract law. The UNIDROIT Principles has more flexibility than international convention. But it has deficit in the sense of legal stability. Also the scope of application of the Principles was discussed. It can be applied only to the international commercial contracts. It includes two basic principles in it's application, i. e. "commercial contracts" and "international contracts". For the rest of the Article the writer concentrates on the contents of the Principles and the basic ideas underlying the Principles from the point of view of the comparision between the UNIDROIT Principles and "the UN Convention on the International Sale of Goods" (CISG). The UNIDROIT Principles are only restatements and the CISG is an international convention. The application of the CISG is obligatory due to its nature as an international convention. In the contrary the possibility of the application of the UNIDROIT Principles is more flexible. The UNIDROIT Principles is a more comprehensive instrument than CISG. Therefore it can be applied to all kinds of international commercial contracts. In the contrary the CISG can be applied only to international sales contract. Since CISG only deals with contracts for the sale of goods, and the scope of the UNIDROIT Principles is much wider, no overlap can occur where contracts other than sales contracts are concerned. Rather the UNIDROIT Principles can supplement the CISG and the CISG also can be criteria in interpreting the UNIDROIT Principles. As the conclusion the writer summarizes the meanings of the UNIDROIT Principles and presupposed the futur perspectives of the Principles.

• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제67권
• /
• pp.1-21
• /
• 2015

U. N. Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods (hereinafter the 'CISG' or the 'Convention') has been in force more than 37 years. The CISG responds to the need for uniform sales law. First of all, the biggest barrier against the uniformity in sales law is so-called "homeward trend". Professor Honnold, who served as secretary of UNCITRAL during the time in which the CISG was developed, pointed out the danger of "homeward trend" like this in his Article. "One threat to international uniformity in interpretation is a natural tendency to read the international text through the lenses of domestic law." CISG Article 79 is the principal provision governing the extent to which a party is exempt from liability for a failure to perform any of his obligations due to an impediment beyond his control. So-called 'Manfred Forberich' decision regarding the article 79 represents the most extreme example of what is likely the most dangerous error that tribunals applying the CISG can make. CISG Article 79 only governs impossibility of performance, and there is a controversy whether a disturbance which does not fully exclude performance, but it considerably more difficult or onerous(hardship, change of circumstances, economic impossibility) can be considered as an impediment. Unlike PICC and PECL, the CISG governs contract of sale. Therefore, events such as a sudden increase in the price of raw materials or a dramatic devaluation of currency, will not allow the seller to avoid his liability for non-delivery of the goods or to require renegotiation of the terms of the contract of sale. We should bear in mind that the CISG should be interpreted and applied in the context of the CISG itself.

• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제5권
• /
• pp.7-44
• /
• 1993

This study is focused on the review of buyer's remedy resulting from the breach of seller's duty in contracts for the international sale of goods focusing on UNCCIS, 1980 and the problems and suggestions of proper ideas for solving the problems. First problem on the buyer's remedy is related to the breach of seller's duty on del ivory of the contracted goods. When seller has failed to deliver the contracted goods to buyer within the stipulated periods, buyer can treat the contract as avoided and claim damages from seller. By the way, since UNCCIS does not provide any stipulation on the time of buyer's avoidance of the contract, buyer can delay the time of avoidance when the price of contracted goods is rising rapidly and enlarge the amount of damages, Since this stipulation is clearly unreasonable, proper solutions are required for UNCCIS. Second problem is related to the breach of seller's duty on deliver of goods which are of the quantity, quality and description required by the contract and which are contained or packged in the manner required by the contract. When seller has failed to deliver goods which are confirm with the contract, buyer may have one of the two rights of damages and the price reduction according to UNCCIS provided that he does not choose the avoidance. But, since the character and position of the price reduction as a buyer's remedy are not sufficient solutions, more detailed review on this point is required. Third, Seller's duty to provide documents is very important for overseas trade, but UNCCIS does not provide any specific buyer's remedy in comparison with the other remedy and also does not provide any stipulation on the Letter of Credit which have important roles for a device of setting payment in overseas trade. This means that trade customs and practice have not sufficiently reflected in UNCCIS. As the problems mentioned above may decrease the evaluation of buyer's remedy in UNCCIS and, furthermore, that of UNCCIS itself, proper solutions on these points are needed.