Source: http://www.cisg.law.pace.edu/cisg/text/peclcomp72.html
Timestamp: 2019-04-26 04:14:01+00:00

Document:
For information on the nature and effect of "termination" under the European Principles, go to the match-up with CISG art. 81 for PECL arts. 9:305 through 9:309 and the comments and notes that accompany these provisions. For the CISG counterpart to "termination " under the PECL, see "avoidance". For the PECL definition of "fundamental non-performance", see the match-up of CISG art. 25 with PECL art. 8:103.
Like the commentary to the UNIDROIT Principles and the U.S. Restatements, the comments to the PECL help explain the text. The PECL notes identify civil law and common law antecedents and related domestic provisions. With the permission of the Commission on European Contract Law, these comments and notes are presented below. The source of this material is Ole Lando & Hugh Beale eds., Principles of European Contract Law: Parts I and II, Kluwer Law International (2000) 416-419.
This Article entitles the aggrieved party to terminate the contract for "anticipatory non-performance", by which is meant an obvious unwillingness or inability to perform where the failure in performance would be fundamental within Article 8:103. The right to terminate for anticipatory non-performance rests on the notion that a party to a contract cannot reasonably be expected to continue to be bound by it once it has become clear that the other party cannot or will not perform at the due date. The effect of this Article is that for the purpose of the remedy of termination an anticipatory fundamental non-performance is equated with a fundamental non-performance after performance has become due.
Illustration 1: In January B agrees to build a house for O and to start work on 1st May. In April B tells O that owing to labour troubles he will not be able to carry out the contract. O may immediately terminate the contract.
Termination under this Article is permitted only where the obligation of which non-performance is threatened is of such kind that its breach would entitle the aggrieved party to terminate the contract. This applies also to a threatened delay in performance. If a party indicates that it will perform but that its performance will be late this does not constitute an anticipatory non-performance within this Article except where time of performance is of the essence of the contract or the threatened delay is so serious as to constitute a fundamental non-performance within Article 8:103.
Illustration 2: B has agreed to build a house to O's design. B informs O that the double glazing specified by O is no longer available but that it can install double glazing from a different supplier which is almost identical. The failure to provide the double glazing originally specified would not, in these circumstances, be a fundamental non-performance, and O therefore cannot treat B's statement as indicating an anticipatory non-performance within this Article.
Illustration 3: In January S contracts to sell goods to B for delivery on 1st March. In February S tells B that delivery will be a few days late. B can treat this as an anticipatory non-performance if time of delivery is of the essence, but not otherwise.
It is implicit in this Article that a party which exercises a right to terminate the contract for anticipatory non-performance has the same rights as on termination for actual non-performance and is therefore entitled to exercise any of the remedies available under this Chapter, including damages, except that damages are not recoverable where the non-performance at the due date would be excused under Article 3.108. See Article 8:101(2).
The party faced with an anticipatory non-performance may terminate the contract at any time while it remains clear that there will be a fundamental non-performance by the other party.
The root of this provision lies in COMMON LAW (cf. Hochster v. de La Tour (1853) E. & B. 678, Q.B.; Universal Cargo Carriers Corp v. Citati  2 Q.B. 401, Q.B.; Clark 414) and corresponds to SCOTTISH law. Unidroit art 7.3.3, art. 72(1) CISG and Art. 76 ULIS also adopt the notion of anticipatory repudiation. The FINNISH and SWEDISH Sale of Goods Acts, �� 61 and 62 adopt the CISG rule: see Ramberg, Köplagen, 583 ff.
The GERMAN BGB does not contain an express provision. However, there is unanimity that an unambiguous and definite refusal to perform is a non-performance, by analogy to BGB �� 280, 286, 325, 326; cf. Staudinger(-Otto), BGB � 326 nos. 135 FF.. Similarly in AUSTRIA, see Rumell (-Reischauer) ABGB � 918 no. 14.
Under DANISH Law the right of a party to terminate the contract in case of anticipatory non-performance is, in general, limited to cases where there is certainty, or probability amounting almost to certainty, that there will be a fundamental non-performance by the other party. This rule, however, is qualified: (1) when a buyer goes bankrupt or becomes insolvent and the time for delivery has come, the seller may terminate the contract unless security is provided (cf. � 39 Sale of Goods Act; � 57 Bankruptcy Act); (2) where the buyer of goods has been declared bankrupt and the administrator of the estate does not confirm the take-over of the contract within a reasonable time, the seller may terminate the contract (cf. � 40 Sale of Goods Act); (3) in a sale where the goods are to be delivered in instalments and where the delay or defect in respect of one instalment or payment for one instalment amounts to a fundamental non-performance (cf. Sale of Goods Act � 29: "unless there is no reason to expect a future delay"; see also �� 22 and 46).
In DUTCH law, BW art. 6:80 provides that the consequences of non-performance operate although the obligation is not yet due (a) if performance is not possible without breach; (b) if from a communication of the debtor the creditor cannot but conclude that there will be a breach of performance; (c) if the creditor has good reasons to fear a breach of performance by the debtor, and has not received adequate assurance of the debtor's willingness to perform.
Under GREEK law, genuine anticipatory breach exists where the debtor before the date for performance expressly declares (AP 339/1982, NoB 30 (1982) 1459 at 1460) or by conduct necessarily implies (Athens 2671/1957, EEN 25 (1958) 538-539), that he will not perform. In such situations, CC art. 385(1) equally relieves the creditor from setting an additional period of performance, and allows him the remedies for damages and termination even prior to the date of performance (Gasis Erm. AK II/1 Introd. remarks to arts. 335-348 no. 62 (1949); Georgiadis & Stathopoulos II Introd. remarks to arts. 335-348 no. 6 (1979); also cf. CC art. 686; in any case, the notice of termination, in terms of time and otherwise, may not result in an abuse of right (CC art. 281)).

References: art. 81
 art. 25
 art. 8
 v. 
 v. 
 art 7
 art. 72
 Art. 76
 art. 6
 art. 385
 art. 686
 art. 281