Source: http://unilex.info/principles/cases/keywords/34
Timestamp: 2019-07-20 09:57:05
Document Index: 165300918

Matched Legal Cases: ['ART. 1326', 'ART. 19', 'ART. 2', 'ART. 2', 'ART. 3', 'ART. 3', 'ART. 3', 'ART. 3', 'ART. 4']

ICC International Court of Arbitration, Milano 8908
00-09-1998
LONG-TERM CONTRACTS - DISTRIBUTION AGREEMENT - BETWEEN AN ITALIAN MANUFACTURER AND LIECHTENSTEIN DISTRIBUTOR - SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN PARTIES - GOVERNED BY DOMESTIC LAW (ITALIAN LAW)- APPLICATION BY ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL OF THE 1980 UNITED NATIONS CONVENTION ON CONTRACTS FOR THE INTERNATIONAL SALE OF GOODS (CISG) AND THE UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES BOTH DEFINED AS NORMATIVE TEXTS THAT CAN BE CONSIDERED HELPFUL IN THE INTERPRETATION OF ALL CONTRACTS OF AN INTERNATIONAL NATURE
INTERPRETATION OF SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT - INTERPRETATION IN ACCORDANCE WITH GOOD FAITH (ARTS. 1337 AND 1362-1371 OF ITALIAN CIVIL CODE; ARTS. 1.7 AND 4.1 - 4.8 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES)
MODIFIED ACCEPTANCE - AMOUNTS TO COUNTER-OFFER - TACIT ACCEPTANCE OF COUNTER-OFFER BY ACT OF PERFORMANCE (ART. 1326(5) OF ITALIAN CIVIL CODE; ART. 19(1)(2) CISG AND ART. 2.11 [ART. 2.1.11 OF THE 2004 EDITION] UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES)
INTEREST - APPLICABLE RATE - RATE GENERALLY APPLIED IN INTERNATIONAL TRADE FOR CONTRACTUAL CURRENCY
ICC International Court of Arbitration, Paris 10504
00-11-2000
SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT - BETWEEN TWO EASTERN EUROPEAN COMPANIES - SOLE ARBITRATOR AUTHORIZED TO ACT "EN ARBITRAGE EQUITABLE" - APPLICATION OF UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES
THREAT COMING FROM A THIRD PARTY - RELEVANT IF IT HAS LEFT THE CONTRACTING PARTY "NO REASONABLE ALTERNATIVE"- REFERENCE TO ART. 3.9 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES
THREAT COMING FROM A THIRD PARTY - CONSIDERED AS A LEGITIMATE GROUND FOR THE AVOIDANCE OF CONTRACT WHEN THE THIRD PARTY IS ACCESSORY TO THE OTHER CONTRACTING PARTY - REFERENCE TO ARTS. 3.11 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES
ICC International Court of Arbitration 13009
SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT - BETWEEN LIECHTENSTEIN SELLER AND SPANISH BUYER - FOLLOWING DISPUTE ARISING FROM A SALES CONTRACT - SALES CONTRACT AND SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT SILENT AS TO APPLICABLE LAW - ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL DECIDED TO APPLY UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES
SELLER'S CLAIM THAT IT HAD BEEN FORCED TO AGREE TO SETTLEMENT UNDER ECONOMIC DURESS BASED ON ARTICLES 1.7, 1.9, 3.8 [ART. 3.2.5 OF THE 2010 EDITION], 3.9 [ART. 3.2.6 OF THE 2010 EDITION], 3.10 [ART. 3.2.7 OF THE 2010 EDITION], 5.1.3 AND 5.1.4, AND 7.4.8 OF UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES - ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL DISMISSED ALL SELLER’S CLAIMS ON BASIS OF FACTS
SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT - BETWEEN TWO AUSTRALIAN COMPANIES - SUBJECT TO AUSTRALIAN LAW - WHETHER THERE SHOULD BE IMPLIED BY LAW INTO THE AGREEMENT A TERM THAT PARTIES MUST ACT IN GOOD FAITH — CONSIDERATION OF WHETHER CONCEPT OF GOOD FAITH FORMS PART OF GENERAL LAW OF CONTRACT OF AUSTRALIA – REFERENCE TO ARTICLE 1.7 OF THE UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES.
SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT - BETWEEN TWO NEW ZEALAND PARTIES - REFERENCE TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES AS A MEANS OF INTERPRETING APPLICABLE DOMESTIC LAW (NEW ZEALAND LAW)
CONTRACT INTERPRETATION - ADMISSIBILITY OF EXTRINSIC EVIDENCE AND IN PARTICULAR OF PRE-CONTRACTUAL NEGOTIATIONS FOR INTERPRETATION OF WRITTEN CONTRACTS - REFERENCE TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES (ART. 4.3)
SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT - BETWEEN A SWEDISH INDIVIDUAL AND A SWEDISH COUNTY DISTRICT -REFERENCE TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES IN SUPPORT OF THE SOLUTION ADOPTED UNDER APPLICABLE DOMESTIC LAW (SWEDISH LAW)
MODIFIED ACCEPTANCE - WRITINGS IN CONFIRMATION - REFERENCE TO ARTICLES 2.1.11 AND 2.1.12 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES