Source: http://www.cisg.law.pace.edu/cisg/wais/db/cases2/930514g1.html
Timestamp: 2019-04-24 08:12:58+00:00

Document:
The German seller of ten electronic ear devices demanded damages for breach of contract by the Italian buyer, who had failed to take delivery despite the additional period of time set by the seller for the buyer to take delivery.
The court held that it had jurisdiction under article 5(1) of the Convention on jurisdiction and the enforcement of judgements in civil and commercial matters, which provides that a party who is domiciled in a Contracting State can be sued before the courts of the place where the obligation giving rise to the dispute had to be performed. The court applied article 31(b) CISG, which was applicable under German private international law as part of German law, and determined that Aachen, where the goods had been manufactured, was the place where the seller was obliged to deliver (art. 31(b) CISG).
The court applied articles 61(1)(b), 63 and 74-77 CISG and found that the buyer had to pay damages to the seller for failing to take delivery of the goods, even after the additional period of time set by the seller had expired.
1. Plaintiff [hereinafter referred to as Seller] is domiciled in Germany and Defendant [hereinafter referred to as Buyer] is domiciled in Italy. Jurisdiction is based upon Art. 5(1) of the Convention on Jurisdiction and the Enforcement of Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters. According to this convention, a person who is domiciled in one of the Contracting States can be sued before the courts of the place where the obligation giving rise to the dispute had to be performed.
2. Buyer had the obligation to take over the electronic hearing aids. In accordance with laws on conflict of laws, the place where the obligation, which is part of the claim, had to be performed, determines the law that is decisive (EuGH [*], NJW [*] 1977, 4911; BGHZ [*] 74, 136, 1392). The relevant law is the United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods (CISG), which was ratified in Italy on 1 January 1988 and in Germany on 1 January 1991. This Convention applies to contracts of sale of goods between parties whose places of business are in different States when contract was concluded after 1 January 1991.
According to Art. 60(b) CISG, the buyer's obligation is to take over the goods. The place of taking delivery is not regulated by law, therefore the place is dependent on the place of delivery by the seller. This is regulated according to Art. 31 CISG, which foresees in Art. 31(b), (c) CISG the obligation to obtain the goods (cf. v. Caemmerer/Schlechtriem/Huber Art. 31, para. 53).
aa) According to its Art. 4, the CISG is not concerned with the validity of the settlement agreement; that issue governed by German domestic law.
d) Rules of frustration or economic hardship (Wegfall der Geschäftsgrundlage) under domestic law or domestic law challenges having to do with mistake as to the quality of the goods are irrelevant because the CISG fills the field in these areas (cf. v. Caemmerer/Schlechtriem/Herber Art. 4 para. 13, 14).
3. Buyer was obliged to take over the electronic hearing aids which were provided by Seller according to Art. 60 CISG. Buyer did not take over the goods.
4. Seller was entitled to claim damages according to Arts. 61(1)(b), 63 CISG, since it set an additional period of time to Buyer to perform its obligations, and the Buyer did not perform its obligations during that time.
5. Seller incurred proportionate damages in the amount of 7,752 Deutsche Mark because Buyer did not take over the electronic hearing aids. However, Buyer could not foresee that Seller would be liable to its distributor if Buyer did not take over the goods.
* All translations should be verified by cross-checking against the original text. For purposes of this translation, Plaintiff of Germany is referred to as [Seller]; Defendant of Italy is referred to as [Buyer].
Translator's note on other abbreviations: EuGH = Europäischer Gerichtshof [European Supreme Court]; BGHZ = Entscheidungen des Bundesgerichtshof in Zivilsachen [Decisions of the Supreme Court in civil cases]; NJW = Neue Juristische Wochenschrift [German weekly judicial magazine].
** Stella Heyken is a law student at the University of Osnabrück, Germany.

References: Art. 5
 Art. 60
 Art. 31
 Art. 31
 v. 
 Art. 31
 Art. 4
 v. 
 Art. 4
 Art. 60