Source: https://www.trans-lex.org/122250/_/ferrari-franco-the-cisgs-interpretative-goals-its-interpretative-method-and-its-general-principles-in-case-law-ihr-5-2013-at-181-et-seq/
Timestamp: 2018-11-18 16:57:49
Document Index: 799810919

Matched Legal Cases: ['Art. 7', 'Art. 11', 'Art. 77', 'Art. 9', 'Art. 74', 'Art. 27', 'Art. 84', 'Art. 40', 'Art. 46', 'Art. 7', 'Art. 79', 'Art. 2', 'Art. 6', 'Art. 6', 'Art. 81', 'art. 74', 'Art. 74', 'Art. 86', 'Art. 87', 'Art. 88', 'Art. 8', 'Art. 25', 'Art. 35', 'Art. 60', 'Art. 79', 'Art. 85', 'Art. 18', 'Art. 33', 'Art. 39', 'Art. 43', 'Art. 47', 'Art. 49', 'Art. 63', 'Art. 64', 'Art. 65', 'Art. 65', 'Art. 75', 'Art. 25', 'art, 20', 'Art. 4', 'Art. 4', 'Art. 4', 'art, 20', 'art, 29', 'Art. 44']

Ferrari, Franco, The CISG's Interpretative Goals, Its Interpretative Method and Its General Principles in Case Law (Part II), IHR 5/2013, at 181 et seq. | Trans-Lex.org
Document-Id: 122250, Please cite as: "https://www.trans-lex.org/122250"
The CISG's Interpretative Goals, Its Interpretative Method and Its General Principles in Case Law (Part II)X. The General Principles of the CISG in Case Law
The CISG's Interpretative Goals, Its Interpretative Method and Its General Principles in Case Law (Part II)
Part I in IHR 4/2013, at 137 et seq.
Professor Dr. Franco Ferrari, LL.M., New York
X. The General Principles of the CISG in Case Law
As far as the general principles are concerned, while there are some that can be identified more easily, since they are underlying one or more specific provisions,336 there are others the identification of which is more difficult, and leads to these principles not enjoying overall acceptance. As for the former category, the most important one is that of party autonomy,337 as also acknowledged by courts338 and arbitral tribunals.339 The importance of this principle can easily be derived from the fact that it is that principle that confers dispositive nature to the CISG340 and, thus, a subsidiary role to it341 (which leads to the rules of the CISG to merely be default rules).342 In this author's opinion,343 this means that where there is a conflict between the principle of party autonomy and any other general principle, the former always prevails.344
Although doubts have been expressed in the past as to whether the principle of good faith constitutes one of the general principles upon which the CISG is based,345 nowadays both com-mentators346 and courts347 acknowledge that the principle of
good faith is one of the general principles referred to in Art. 7(2) CISG. This does not mean, however, that the principle of good faith can be used to justify any equitable result. Rather, the principle at hand, like all other general principles underlying the CISG, have to be used solely when the gap is one that requires resort to general principles. Thus, as mentioned already,348 one must criticize a German court for going too far when it stated that an explicit declaration of avoidance of the contract was not nec-essary once the seller had refused to perform its obligations, even though the CISG itself expressly requires such declaration, since to insist ort such a declaration would be against the principle of good faith.349
Although the principle of good faith has already been resorted to by courts to solve specific matters governed by, albeit not settled in, the CISG,350 commentators have stated that the principle of good faith is generally too vague to serve any practical purpose,351 which lead to the identification of general principles that can be traced back to that of good faith, but which have a narrower scope and may be of more use in practice.352 Among these general principles, both courts353 and commentators354 list that of the prohibition of venire contra factum proprium as well as that of estoppel,355 which some commentators consider to be comparable to one another,356 and which can be derived from specific provisions of the CISG, such as Artt. 16(2) and 29(2).357 Furthermore, from the principle of good faith another more specific principles has been derived,358 namely that pursuant to which parties are required to cooperate with each other,359 which
requires, inter alia, parties to exchange Information relevant for the Performance of their respective obligations.360
The aforementioned principles (of party autonomy and good faith) are not the only general principles which can be derived from one or more specific CISG provisions. The principle of informality (or freedom from form requirements, which can be derived from Art. 11 CISG) also constitutes such a general principle,361 as also pointed out by courts;362 from this principle it follows, among other things, that the parties are also free to modify or terminate their contract in any form be it either in writing or orally or in any other form. Even an implied termi-nation of the contract has been held possible.363
Another such general principle is that of mitigation,364 set forth in Art. 77 CISG, pursuant to which a party who relies on a breach of contract must take such measures as are reasonable in the circumstances to mitigate the loss, including loss of profit, resulting from the breach, in order to avoid the party in breach to be entitled to claim a reduction in the damages in the amount by which the loss should have been mitigated.365
Similarly, the following general principles underlying a CISG Provision have been identified: the principle - underlying Art. 9 (2) CISG - pursuant to which the parties are bound, unless oth-erwise agreed, by a usage of which they knew or ought to have known and which in international trade is widely known to, and regularly observed by, parties to contracts of the type involved in the particular trade concerned;366 the principle pursuant to which the creditor is entitled to interest on sums in arrears,367 and this from the day of non-payment,368 irrespective of any notice of default;369 the principle - of Civil Law origin370 - pursuant to
which damages are limited to foreseeable ones,371 a principle that, as much as that of füll compensation,372 can be derived from Art. 74 CISG; the principle, laid down in Art. 27 CISG, pursuant to which for the purpose of the effectiveness of a declaration or notice its dispatch is sufficient,373 unless otherwise stated in the CISG;374 the principle pursuant to which official holidays or non-business days are included in calculating a period of time which, however, has to be extended where the last day of the period falls on such holiday or non-business day;375 the principle, to be derived from Art. 84 CISG, pursuant to which the party at fault has to refund the amounts equal to its enrichment;376 the principle enshrined in Art. 40 CISG acknowledged both by commenta-tors377 and courts,378 pursuant to which "a grossly negligent un-knowing buyer appears to be more protection-worthy than a seller acting fraudulently",379 as well as the principle "impossibilia nulla est obligatio", which underlies Art. 46(1) CISG.380
Apart from the foregoing general principles, which all can be traced back to specific provisions, there are other general principles which can be derived by looking at a wider, more compre-hensive context,381 which, however, does not exclude that specific provisions constitute a starting point for determining whether a general principle exist. One such principle is that of "reasonable-ness"382 to which the CISG often refers;383 while at times the CISG refers to the parties as having (to have) the qualities of "reason-able persons";384 at other times, the CISG requires that the parties act within a "reasonable" period of time.385
Other principles of the kind at hand include: the principle pursuant to which the party acting in reliance upon a Situation created by opposing party is to be protected, a principle to be derived from Artt. 16(2) and 29(2); the principle of favor con-tractus,386 "which means that, whenever possible, a Solution should be adopted in favour of the valid existence of the contract and against its premature termination on the initiative of one of the parties",387 thus making the avoidance of the contract a remedy of last resort;388 the principle pursuant to which the avoidance of the contract, where the contract is severable, solely affects the part of the contract the breach relates to;389 the principle pursuant to which "each party has to bear the costs of its Obligation";390 the principle, to be derived inter alia from Artt. 58(1)
and 71(1),391 pursuant to which a party is entitled to withhold its Performance in case of the opposing party's breach of contract392 as well as the principle of simultaneous exchange of Performances.393 The "functional equivalence approach", too, must be considered a general principle underlying the CISG;394 this is relevant for the purpose of determining the CISG's relationship with domestic law.395
Case law has dealt with the issue of whether a general principle in respect of the place of Performance of monetary obligations exist. One court expressly stated that "since the purchase price is payable at the place of business of the seller", under Article 57 CISG, "this indicates a general principle valid for other monetary claims as well",396 a view also taken by other courts.397 Never-theless, in this author's opinion a general principle cannot be derived from the CISG as to the place of Performance of the monetary Obligation,398 an opinion also shared by courts.399
Similarly, this author400 does not share the view held by some commentators401 according to which the CISG is based upon the general principle pursuant to which the creditor's place of business controls all questions relating to payment such as currency. Since the issue of currency is not at all governed by the CISG,402 as courts have offen pointed out,403 it is impossible to identify a general principle upon which the CISG is based. Since, as offen stated by courts,404 set-off is not a matter governed by the CISG
either, no general principle underlying the CISG can exist. Rather, resort is to be had directly to the applicable law through private international law rules to deal with such issues.405
According to some courts406 and commentators,407 the issue of the allocation of the bürden of proof is not governed by the CISG, which is why resort is to be had to the applicable domestic law to settle that issue. If this were true, it would obviously run counter the wording of Art. 7(2) CISG to attempt to identify a general principle in respect of that issue. In this author's opinion,408 the foregoing view has, however, to be rejected. The issue of bürden of proof is a matter governed by, albeit not explicitly settled in, the CISG,409 thus imposing upon the interpreter the need to settle the issue of allocation of bürden proof from within the CISG itself, namely through resort to a general principle, if such principle exist. According to both case law and legal writing, two general principles can be derived from Art. 79(1) CISG410 and, at least according to one court, Art. 2(a) CISG: the principle pursuant to which the party which wants to derive beneficial legal consequences from a legal provision has to prove the existence of the factual prerequisites of the provision,411 in other words, ei in-cumbit probatio qui diät, non qui negat,412 and that according to which the party claiming an exception has to prove the factual prerequisites of that exception.413 According to one court, this means, e.g., that "a party who claims that the Convention does not apply because the transaction is not international must prove the lack of internationality, and a party who claims that the Convention does not apply because its applicability has been excluded as provided in Art. 6 must prove the existence of the agreement to exclude. There is no doubt that a party who seeks damages for breach by the other party must prove the breach, the damage and the causal nexus between the two, and it has to show that the damages are recoverable under Article 74 of the Convention [... ]. Concerning the question of the lack of conformity of the goods in the instant case, the aforementioned general principle yields a result similar to the outcome under Italian and German law - that it is the buyer's responsibility to prove the existence of a lack of conformity."414
336 See Adame Goddard, supra note 332, at 8; Bammarny, supra note 237,â¨at 160; Ferrari, supra note 306, at 11; see, however, Herber/Czerwen-â¨ka, supra note 27, at 49, stating that "in the CISG, general principles areâ¨hardly identified expressly."
337 See Achilles, supra note 14, at 30; Bammarny, supra note 237, at 162 f.;â¨Burkart, supra note 29, at 194; Dejaco, supra note 14, at 44; Felemegas,â¨supra note 11,284; Ferrari, supra note 34, at 227; Frigge, supra note 12, atâ¨294; Garro/Zuppi, supra note 265, at 58 note 10; Hackney, supra noteâ¨21, at 478; Hager, supra note 11, at 321; Huber /Mullis, supra note 14, atâ¨34; Richard Hyland, Conformity ofGoods to the Contract ander the Unitedâ¨Nations Sales Convention and the Uniform Commercial Code, in Einâ¨heitliches Kaufrecht und nationales Obligationenrecht,â¨supra note 222, 305, 329 ff.; Janssen /Kiene, supra note 307, at 271 f.;â¨Karollus, supra note 14, at 16 f.; Kramer, supra note 11, at 149; Kritzer,â¨supra note 15, at 114; Magnus, supra note 13, at 176; Mather, supra noteâ¨302, at 158 and 165; Melis, supra note 242, at 59; Paal, supra note 306, atâ¨78; Perales Viscasillas, supra note 14, at 137; Piltz, supra note 21, at 98;â¨Reifner, supra note 96, at 54; Saenger, supra note 14, at 441; Schwenzer/â¨Hachem, supra note 24, at 136; Schroeter, Freedom of contract: Compar-â¨ison between provisions ofthe CISG (Artide 6) and counterpart provisionsâ¨of the Principles of European Contract Law, 6 Vindobona J. 257, 258â¨(2002); Veneziano, supra note 55, at 514.
338 See Polimeles Protodikio Athinon, docket No. 4505/2009 (no date indi-â¨cated), available on the Internet at http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/09450â¨5gr.html#ii2; Tribunale di Padova, 25 February 2004, Internationalesâ¨Handelsrecht 31 (2005); Tribunale di Rimini, 26 November 2002,â¨available on the Internet at http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/021126i3.â¨html; Hof Beroep Gent, 15 May 2002, available on the Internet at http://â¨cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/020515bl.html; Rechtbank van Koophandelâ¨Ieper, 18 February 2002, available on the Internet at http://www.law.kulâ¨euven.be/ipr/eng/cases/2002 - 02-18.html; Rechtbank Koophandel Ieper,â¨29 January 2001, available on the Internet at http://www.law.kuleuven.ac.â¨be/int/tradelaw/WK/2001 - 01-29.htm; LG Stendal, 12 October 2000,â¨available on the Internet at http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/001012gl.â¨html.
339 See Foreign Trade Court of Arbitration attached to the Yugoslav Chamberâ¨of Commerce, Arbitral award of 9 December 2002, available on the Inâ¨ternet at http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/021209sb.html.
340 For references to the CISG's dispositive nature, see, in legal writing, Car-â¨bone, supra note 19, at 78; Carbone/Luzzatto, supra note 265, at 131;â¨Alfonso-Luis Calvo Caravaca, Art. 6, in La compraventa internacio-â¨nal de mercaderias, supra note 237, 92,92; Ferrari, supra note 270, atâ¨140; Lanciotti, supra note 29, at 146; Jochen Lindbach, Rechtsâ¨wahl im Einheitsrecht am Beispiel des Wiener Kaufrechtsâ¨67 f. (Shaker: Aachen 1996); Giorgio Sacerdoti, i criteri di applicazioneâ¨della convenzione di Vienna sulla vendita internazionale: diritto uniforme, diritto internazionale privato e autonomia dei contraenti, Rivista tri-mestrale di diritto e procedura civile 744 (1990); Witz, supra note 265, at 107; for an express reference to the CISG's non-mandatory nature in case law, see For an express reference to the Convention's non-mandatory nature, see Obergericht Kanton Bern, 19 May 2008, available on the Internet at http://globalsaleslaw.com/content/api/cisg/urteiIe/1738. pdf; Shanghai High People's Court, 17 May 2007, available on the Internet at http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/070517cl.html; Tribunal cantonal de Vaud, 24 November 2004, available on the Internet at http:// globalsaleslaw.com/content/api/cisg/urteile/1842.pdf; Tribunal Cantonal du Jura, 3 November 2004, available on the Internet at http://cisgw3.law. pace.edu/cases/041103sl.html; Tribunal cantonal du Vaud, 11 April 2002, available on the Internet at http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/020411sl. html; Cassazione civile, 19 June 2000, available on the Internet at http:// cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/000619i3.html; Oberster Gerichtshof, 21 March 2000, available on the Internet at http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/000321 a3.html; Oberster Gerichtshof, 15 October 1998, available on the Internet at http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/981015a3.html; Handelsgericht Wien, 4 March 1997, available on the Internet at http://www.cisg.at/lR4097x. htm; Kantonsgericht Wallis, 29 June 1994, available on the Internet at http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/940629sl.html.
341 For this thesis, see, for example, Honnold/Flechtner, supra note 29,â¨at 4 (stating that "the Convention's rules play a supporting role, supplyingâ¨answers to problems that the parties have failed to solve by contract"); forâ¨a similar conclusion, see Kazuaki Sono, The Vienna Sales Convention:â¨History and Perspective, in International Säle of Goods. Dubrov-â¨nik Lectures 1,14 (P.Sarcevic & P.Volken eds., Oceana: New York 1986)â¨(stating that "the rules contained in the Convention are only supplemen-â¨tary for those cases where the parties did not provide otherwise in theirâ¨contract").
342 See, among many, Allen E. Farnsworth, Rights and Obligations ofâ¨the Seller, in Wiener Übereinkommen von 1980 über den interâ¨nationalen Warenkauf 83,84 (Schulthess: Zürich 1985) ("[I]ncaseofaâ¨conflict between the contract and the Convention, it is the contract-notâ¨the Convention-that controls").
343 See Ferrari, supra note 22, at 178; Ferrari, supra note 34, at 227.
344 For this conclusion, see also Kritzer, supra note 15, at 115.
345 See Ferrari, supra note 75, at 150.
346 Achilles, supra note 14, at 30; Burkart, supra note 29, at 194; Dejaco,â¨supra note 14, at 44; Diesse, supra note 187, at 58 ff; Herber /Czerwen-â¨ka, supra note 27, at 49; Melis, supra note 242, at 59; Janssen /Kiene, supraâ¨note 307, at 272; Karollus, supra note 14, at 12; Mather, supra note 302,â¨at 157; Paal, supra note 306, at 82; Christian Thiele, Erfüllungsort bei derâ¨Rückabwicklung von Vertragspflichen nach Art. 81 UN-Kaufrecht - einâ¨Plädoyer gegen die herrschende Meinung, Recht der internationalenâ¨Wirtschaft 892, 894 (2000); Vogel, supra note 242, at 12; Witz etâ¨als., supra note 19, at 93; but see Loewe, supra note 333, at 33.
347 See Oberlandesgercht Celle, 24 July 2009, available on the Internet at http://â¨cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/090724gl.html; Rechtbank Rotterdam, 25 Febâ¨ruary 2009, available on the Internet at http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/â¨090225nl.html; OLG München, 14 January 2009, Internationalesâ¨Handelsrecht 201 (2009); OLG Brandenburg, 18 November 2008, Inâ¨ternationales Handelsrecht 105 (2009); Tribunal of Internationalâ¨Commercial Arbitration at the Russian Federation Chamber of Comâ¨merce and Industry, Arbitral award of 8 February 2008, available on theâ¨Internet at http://www.unilex.info/case.cfm?pid=18rdo=case&id= 14978tâ¨step=FullText; Audiencia Provincial de Navarra, 27 December 2007, availâ¨able on the Internet at http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/071227s4.html;â¨Tribunale di Rovereto, 21 November 2007, available on the Internet atâ¨http://www.unilex.info/case.cfm?pid=l&do=case&id=1219&step=Fullâ¨Text; American Arbitration Association, Arbitral award of 23 Octoberâ¨2007, available on the Internet at http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/07102â¨3a5.html; OLG Köln, 21 December 2005, Internationales Handelsâ¨recht 86 (2006); LG Neubrandenburg, 3 August 2005, Internatioâ¨nales Handelsrecht 26 (2006); Tribunal of International Commercialâ¨Arbitration at the Russian Federation Chamber of Commerce and Indusâ¨try, Arbitral award of 2 June 2005, available on the Internet at http://cisgâ¨w3.law.pace.edu/cases/050602rl.html; Tribunal of International Comâ¨mercial Arbitration at the Russian Federation Chamber of Commerceâ¨and Industry, Arbitral award 27 May 2005, available on the internet atâ¨http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/050527rl.html; Primer Tribunal Cole-â¨giado en Materia Civil del Primer Circuito, 10 March 2005, available on the Internet at http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/050310ml.html; Single-Member Court of First Instance Larissa, docket No. 165/2005 (no date indicated), abstract available on the Internet at http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/ cases/050165gr.html; Tribunale di Padova, 25 February 2004, Internationales Handelsrecht 31 (2005); Hof's-Gravenhage, 23 April 2003, Internationales Handelsrecht 119 (2004); ICC Court of Arbitration, Arbitral award in case No. 11849, available on the Internet at http:// cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/031849il.html; Foreign Trade Court of Arbitration attached to the Yugoslav Chamber of Commerce, Arbitral award of 9 December 2002, available on the Internet at http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/ cases/021209sb.html; Hof van Beroep Gent, 15 May 2002, available on the Internet at http://www.law.kuleuven.be/ipr/eng/cases/2002-05-15.html; Bundesgerichtshof, 9 January 2002, Internationales Handelsrecht 16 (2002); OLG Hamm, 12 November 2001, available on the Internet at http:// cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/011112gl.html; Bundesgerichtshof, 31 October 2001, Internationales Handelsrecht 14 (2002); Oberster Gerichtshof, 22 October 2001, Internationales Handelsrecht 24 (2002); OLG München, 21 January 1998, available on the Internet at http://cisg w3.law.pace.edu/cases/980121gl.html; Handelsgericht des Kantons Zürich, 30 November 1998, available on the Internet at http://cisgw3.law.pace. edu/cases/981130sl.html; Corte d'Appello Milano, 11 December 1998, available on the Internet at http://www.unilex.info/case.cfm?pid=l&do= case&id=359&step=FullText; Compromex Arbitration, 30 November 1998, available on the Internet at http://www.uc3m.es/cisg/rmexi3.htm; OLG Hamburg, 28 February 1997, available on the Internet at http://cisg w3.law.pace.edu/cases/970228gl.html; Rechtbank Arnhem, 17 July 1997, available on the Internet at http://www.unilex.info/case.cfm?pid= 1 &do=c ase&id=355&step=FullText; LG München, 6 May 1997, available on the Internet at http://www.jura.uni-freiburg.de/iprl/cisg/urteile/text/341.htm; LG Saarbrücken, 26 March 1996, available on the internet at http://cisg w3.law.pace.edu/cases/960326gl.html; Schiedsgericht der Handelskammer 21 Marchjune 1996, available on the Internet at http://cisgw3.law. pace.edu/cases/960321gl.html; OLG Celle, 24 May 1995, available on the Internet at http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/950524gl.html; ICC International Court of Arbitration, Arbitral award No. 8128/1995, available on the Internet at http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/958128il.html; Arbitration Court attached to the Hungarian Chamber of Commerce and Indus- try, Arbitral award No. VB/94124, published on the Internet at http:// www.unilex.info/case.cfm?pid= 18cdo=case&id=217&step=FullText; Cour d'appel Grenoble, 22 February 1995, available on the Internet at http://cisg w3.law.pace.edu/cases/950222fl.html; Renard Constructions v. Minister for Public Works, Court of Appeal, New South Wales, 12 March 1992, available on the Internet at http://www.unilex.info/case.cfm?pid=18tdo= case&id=57&step= FullText.
348 See supra the text accompanying note 215.
349 OLG Hamburg, 28 February 1997, available on the Internet at http://cisgâ¨w3.law.pace.edu/cases/970228gl.html.
350 See, e.g., Rechtbank Rotterdam, 25 February 2009, available on the Interâ¨net at http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/090225nl.html, where the courtâ¨resorted to the general principle at hand to solve under what conditionsâ¨Standard contract terms become part of the offer; see also Tribunale diâ¨Rovereto, 21 November 2007, available on the Internet at http://www.uniâ¨lex.info/case.cfm?pid=18cdo=case&id=12198cstep=FullText; OLG Köln,â¨21 December 2005, Internationales Handelsrecht 86 (2006); LGâ¨Neubrandenburg, 3 August 2005, Internationales Handelsrechtâ¨26 (2006); Hooge Raad, 28 January 2005, available on the Internet atâ¨http://www.unilex.info/case.cfm?pid=l&do=case8dd=1012&step=FullText.
351 See, e.g., Magnus, supra note 36, at 480.
352 See, e.g., Magnus, supra note 13, at 175.
353 Bundesgerichtshof, 26 September 2012, Internationales Handelsâ¨recht 231, 236 (2012); OLG München, 15 September 2004, Internaâ¨tionales Handelsrecht 70 (2005); Tribunale di Padova, 31 Marchâ¨2004, Internationales Handelsrecht 33 (2005); Tribunale di Padoâ¨va, 25 February 2004, Internationales Handelsrecht 31 (2005).
354 See Achilles, supra note 14, at 30; Brunner, supra note 14, at 76;â¨Burkart, supra note 29, at 195; Dejaco, supra note 14, at 44; Diesse,â¨supra note 187, at 62 and 83; Alfred Escher, VN-Kaufrecht: stillschweigenâ¨der Verzicht aufEinwant einer verspäteten Mängelrüge, Recht der inâ¨ternationalen Wirtschaft 495, 500 (1999); Felemegas, supra noteâ¨11, at 402; Ferrari, supra note 22, at 179; Nadja Hoffmann, Die Koorâ¨dination des Vertrags- und Deliktsrechts in Europa: eineâ¨rechtsvergleichende Untersuchung zum Kollisionsrecht,â¨Sachrecht und zum UN-Kaufrecht 287 (Mohr: Tübingen 2006);â¨Najork, supra note 14, at 105; Niemann, supra note 11, at 64; Sannini,â¨supra note 94, at 49; Elisabeth Sauthoff, Lieferverzug als wesentliche Verâ¨tragsverletzung bei Vereinbarung sofortiger Lieferung und wirksame Einâ¨beziehung fremdsprachiger AGB, Internationales Handelsrechtâ¨151, 153 (2005); Schwenzer/Hachem, supra note 24, at 136; Teichert,â¨supra note 12, at 30; Witz et als., supra note 19, at 84.
355 See Tribunal of International Commercial Arbitration at the Russianâ¨Federation Chamber of Commerce and Industry, Arbitral awardâ¨No. 302/1996, on the Internet at http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/99072â¨7rl.html; OLG Karlsruhe, 25 June 1997, Recht der internationalenâ¨Wirtschaft 235 (1998); Internationales Schiedsgericht der Bundeskamâ¨mer der gewerblichen Wirtschaft, Arbitral awards SCH-4366 and SCH-â¨4318, Recht der internationalen Wirtschaft 590 (1995); Hofâ¨s'Hertogenbosch, 26 February 1992, available on the Internet at http://â¨www.unilex.info/case.cfm?pid=l&do=case&id=97&step=FullText; in leâ¨gal writing see Ferrari, supra note 22, at 179; Ulrich Magnus, Die allgeâ¨meinen Grundsätze im UN-Kaufrecht, RabelsZ 469, 481 (1995); contraâ¨in case law Rechtbank Amsterdam, 5 October 1994, Nederlands In-â¨ternationaal Privaatrecht no. 231 (1995).
356 Schwenzer/Hachem, supra note 24, at 136.
357 See, e.g., Ferrari, supra note 306, at 12; Najork, supra note 14, at 105.
358 In case law, see OLG Koblenz, 24 February 2011, Internationalesâ¨Hansdelsrecht 148, 152-153 (2012); Oberlandesgercht Celle, 24 Julyâ¨2009, available on the Internet at http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/090724â¨gl.html; Tribunale di Rovereto, 21 November 2007, available on the Inâ¨ternet at http://www.unilex.info/case.cfm?pid=18cdo=case8rid= 1219&steâ¨p=FullText; OLG Köln, 21 December 2005, Internationales Hanâ¨delsrecht 86 (2006); LG Neubrandenburg, 3 August 2005, Internaâ¨tionales Handelsrecht 26 (2006); Foreign Trade Court of Arbitraâ¨tion attached to the Yugoslav Chamber of Commerce, Arbitral award of 9â¨December 2002, available on the Internet at http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/caâ¨ses/021209sb.html; available on the Internet at http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/â¨cisg/wais/db/cases2/011031gl.html.
359 See e.g., Audit, supra note 14, at 51; Felemegas, supra note 11, at 285;â¨Franco Ferrari, General Principles and International Uniform Commercialâ¨Law Conventions: A Study of the 1980 Vienna Sales Convention and the 1988 UNIDROIT Conventions, Uniform L. Rev. 451, 464 (1997); Hon-nold, supra note 222, at 140; Honnold/Flechtner, supra note 29, at 145; Magnus, supra note 355, at 483; Melin, supra note 14, at 414; Niemann, supra note, at 63; Plantard, supra note 252, at 333; Rosenberg, supra note 12, at 452; Saenger, supra note 14, at 442; Sannini, supra note 94, at 49; Teichert, supra note 12, at 31; Marco Torsello, Remediesfor Breach of Contract under the 1980 Convention on Contracts for the International Säle ofGoods (CISG), in Quo Vadis CISG?, supra note 68, 43, 55.
360 Honnold /Flechtner, supra note 29, at 144; Mather, supra note 302, atâ¨157; Witz et als., supra note 19, at 85; contra Magnus, supra note 13, atâ¨179 f.
361 Achilles, supra note 14, at 30; Bammarny, supra note 237, at 167;â¨Boneil, supra note 30, at 80; Dejaco, supra note 14, at 44; Felemegas,â¨supra onte 11, at 285; Ferrari, supra note 280, at 2; Ferrari, supra noteâ¨34, at 228; Herber /Czerwenka, supra note 27, at 50; Huber /Mullis,â¨supra note 14, at 34; Janssen/Kiene, supra note 307, at 276 f.; Peralesâ¨Viscasillas, supra note 14, at 137; Mather, supra note 302, at 158; Willibaldâ¨Posch & Ulfried Terlitza, Entscheidungen des österreichischen Oberstenâ¨Gerichtshofs zur UN-Kaufrechtskonvention (CISG), Internationalesâ¨Handelsrecht 47, 50 (2001); Reinhart, supra note 74, at 32; Schwen-â¨zer/Hachem, supra note 24, at 136; Thiele, supra note 346, at 894; contraâ¨Jametti Greiner, supra note 14, at 46 f.
362 See Rechtbank Arnhem, 17 January 2007, available on the Internet at http://â¨cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/070117nl.html; Tribunale di Padova, 31 Marchâ¨2004, Internationales Handelsrecht 33 (2005); Tribunale di Padoâ¨va, 25 February 2004, Internationales Handelsrecht 31 (2005);â¨Rechtbank Rotterdam, 12 July 2001, available on the Internet at http://â¨cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/010712nl.html; Bundesgericht, 15 Septemberâ¨2000, available on the Internet at http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/00091â¨5s2.html; Compromex Arbitration, 16 July 1996, available on the Internetâ¨at http://www.uc3m.es/cisg/rmexi2.htm>; Compromex Arbitration,â¨Mexico, 29 April 1996, available on the Internet at http://www.uc3m.es/â¨cisg/rmexi2.htm; Oberster Gerichtshof, February 6,1996, available on theâ¨Internet at http://131.152.131.200/cisg/urteile/224.htm.
363 Oberster Gerichtshof, 29 June 1999, available on the Internet at http://cisgâ¨w3.law.pace.edu/cases/990629a3.html.
364 See Achilles, supra note 14, at 30; Audit, supra note 14, at 52; Berâ¨trand Botzenhardt, Die Auslegung des Begriffs der wesentâ¨lichen Vertragsverletzung im UN-Kaufrecht 151 (Peter Lang:â¨Frankfurt 1998); Enderlein et als., supra note 32, at 64; Ferrari, supraâ¨note 22, at 179 f.; Frigge, supra note 12, at 294; Gruber, supra note 24, atâ¨294; Honnold /Flechtner, supra note 29, at 145 ff.; Magnus, supraâ¨note 355, at 483; Mather, supra note 302, at 157; Perales Viscasillas, supraâ¨note 14, at 137; Sannini, supra note 94, at 49; Karin Sein 8t Irene Kuli, Dieâ¨Bedeutung des UN-Kaufrechts im estnischen Recht, Internationalesâ¨Handelsrecht 138,139 (2005); Thiele, supra note 346, at 894; Westerâ¨mann, supra note 218, at 2199; Witz et als., supra note 19, at 93.
365 See Bundesgerichtshof, 26 September 2012,231, 236 venire(2012); Tribuâ¨nale di Padova, 25 February 2004, Internationales Handelsrechtâ¨31 (2005); Tribunale di Rimini, 26 November 2002, available on the Inâ¨ternet at http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/021126i3.html; LG Zwickau,â¨19 March 1999, available on the Internet at http://www.jura.uni-freiburg.â¨de/iprl/cisg/urteile/text/519.htm; ICC Court of Arbitration, Arbitralâ¨award No. 8817, available on the Internet at http://www.unilex.info/case.â¨cfm?pid=l&do=case&id=3988cstep=FullText.
366 See Achilles, supra note 14, at 30; Dore/Defranco, supra note 193, at 63;â¨Felemegas, supra note 11, at 284; Ferrari, supra note 34, at 229; Saenger,â¨supra note 14, at 442; Karollus, supra note 14, at 17; Melin, supra noteâ¨14, at 414; Niemann, supra note 11, at 61; Perales Viscasillas, supra noteâ¨14, at 137; Plantard, supra note 252, at332; Sein/Kull, supra note 364, atâ¨139; Teichert, supra note 12, at 31; in case law Tribunale di Padova,â¨25 February 2004, Internationales Handelsrecht 31 (2005); Tribuâ¨nale di Rimini, 26 November 2002, available on the Internet at http://cisgâ¨w3.law.pace.edu/cases/021126i3.html; Rechtbank Koophandel Ieper,â¨29 January 2001, available on the Internet at http://www.)aw.kuleuven.â¨ac.be/int/tradelaw/WK/2001 - 01-29.htm.
367 In legal writing, see Ferrari, supra note 22, at 180; Westermann, supra noteâ¨218, at 2201; in case law, see Tribunale di Padova, 31 March 2004, Interâ¨nationales Handelsrecht 33 (2005); ICC Court of Arbitration, Arâ¨bitral award No. 8908, available on the Internet at http://www.unilex.info/â¨case.cfm?pid= 1 &do=case8rid= 4018tstep=FullText
368 See, e.g., Handelsgericht Aargau, 26 November 2008, available on theâ¨Internet at http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/081126sl.html; Amtsgerichtâ¨Freiburg, 6 July 2007, available on the Internet at http://cisgw3.law.pace.â¨edu/cases/070706gl.html; Handelsgericht Zürich, 22 December 2005, Inâ¨ternationales Handelsrecht 161 (2006); Tribunal Cantonal du Va-â¨lais, 27 May 2005, available on the Internet at http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/â¨cases/050527sl.html; Kantonsgericht Nidwaiden, 23 May 2005, Interâ¨nationales Handelsrecht 253 (2005); Kantonsgericht Zug, 2 Deâ¨cember 2004, Internationales Handelsrecht 158 (2006); LG Saarâ¨brücken, 1 June 2004, available on the Internet at http://cisgw3.law.pace.â¨edu/cases/040601gl.html; OLG Düsseldorf, 28 May 2004, Internatioâ¨nales Handelsrecht 203 (2004).
369 See, e.g., Polimeles Protodikio Athinon, docket No. 4505/2009 (no dateâ¨indicated), available on the Internet at http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/â¨094505gr.html; Handelsgericht Aargau, 26 November 2008, available onâ¨the Internet at http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/081126sl.html; Kantonsâ¨gericht Appenzell-Ausserhoden, 6 September 2007, available on the Inâ¨ternet at http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/070906sl.html; Tribunal Canâ¨tonal du Valais, 27 April 2007, available on the Internet at http://cisgw3.law.â¨pace.edu/cases/070427sl.html; OLG Köln, 3 April 2006, available on theâ¨Internet at http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/060403gl.html; Handelsâ¨gericht Zürich, 22 December 2005, Internationales Handelsrechtâ¨161 (2006); Rechtbank van Koophandel Hasselt, 20 September 2005,â¨available on the Internet at http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/050920bl.â¨html; Tribunal Cantonal du Valais, 27 May 2005, available on the Internetâ¨at http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/050527sl.html; LG Bamberg, 13 Aprilâ¨2005, available on the Internet at http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/050413â¨gl.html; Handelsgericht Bern, 22 December 2004, available on the Interâ¨net at http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/041222sl.html.
370 See pranco Ferrari, Hadley v. Baxendale: La prevedibilitä dell'art. 74 CISG,â¨in 3 Trattato della responsabilitä conrattuale. Il risarci- MENTO DEL DANNO CONTRATTUALE. La RESPONSABILITÄ PER RITAR- do e per fatto degli ausiliari 365 (G. Visintini ed., Cedam: Padua 2009); Franco Ferrari, Comparative Ruminations on the Foreseeability of Damages in Contract Law, 53 La. L. Rev. 1257 (1993); Franco Ferrari, Prevedibilitä deidanno e contemplation ruh, Contratto e impresa 760 (1993).
371 Achilles, supra note 14, at 31; Enderlein et als., supra note 32, at 64;â¨Ferrari,supra note 22, at 180; Frignani, supra note 319, at 308; Maskow,â¨supra note 99, at 57; Witz et als., supra note 19, at 93.
372 See Callaghan, supra note 12, at 200; Colligan, supra note 308, at 50 f.;â¨Darkey, supra note 100, at 150; Ferrari, supra note 34, at 228; Flambouras,â¨supra note 53, at 289; Hager, supra note 11, at 321; Huber/Mullis,â¨supra note 14, at 34; Koneru, supra note 11, at 125; Perales Viscasillas,â¨supra note 14, at 137; Daniela Roßmeier, Schadensersatz und Zinsen nachâ¨UN-Kaufrecht - Art. 74 bis 78 CISG, Recht der internationalernâ¨Wirtschaft 407, 408 (2000); Schwenzer/Hachem, supra note 24, atâ¨138; Thiele, supra note 346, at 112; van Alstine, supra note 11, at 752; inâ¨case law see, Tribunale di Padova, 25 February 2004, Internationalesâ¨Handelsrecht 31 (2005); Oberster Gerichtshof, 9March 2000, avail-â¨able on the Internet at http://www.cisg.at/6_31199z.htm; Internationalesâ¨Schiedsgericht der Bundeskammer der gewerblichen Wirtschaft, Arbitralâ¨award of 15 June 1994, available on the Internet at http://cisgw3.law.pace.â¨edu/cases/940615a4.html; for a more restrictive approach to the füll comâ¨pensation principle, see Oberster Gerichtshof, March 9,2000, available onâ¨the Internet at http://www.cisg.at/6_31199z.htm.
373 See Bonell, supra note 30, at 80; Enderlein et als., supra note 32, at 64,â¨Mather, supra note 302, at 158; in case law see Tribunale di Padova,â¨25 February 2004, Internationales Handelsrecht 31 (2005); Tribuâ¨nale di Rimini, 26 November 2002, available on the Internet at http://cisgâ¨w3.law.pace.edu/cisg/wais/db/cases2/021126i3.html.
374 See Ferrari, supra note 22, at 180; Magnus, supra note 13, at 180.
375 Bammarny, supra note 237, at 160; Ferrari, supra note 22, at 180; Herb-â¨er/Czerwenka, supra note 27, at 50; Schwenzer/Hachem, supra noteâ¨24, at 137.
376 See Schlechtriem/Witz, supra note 270, at 64.
377 See Ferrari, supra note 22, at 180.
378 See Arbitration Institute of the Stockholm Chamber of Commerce, Arb-â¨nitral award of 5 June 1998, available on the Internet at http://cisgw3.law.â¨pace.edu/cases/980605s5.html.
379 OLG Köln, 21 May 1996, available on the Internet at http://cisgw3.law.pace.â¨edu/cases/980605s5.html.
380 See Ivo Bach 8c Christoph Stieber, Die Unmöglichkeit der Leistung imâ¨CISG, Internationales Handelsrecht 59 (2006).
381 Magnus, supra note 355, at 478; see also Audit, supra note 14, at 51;â¨Ferrari, supra note 22, at 180; Sannini, supra note 94, at 49; for remarksâ¨that are critical of the way to derive general principles underlying theâ¨CISG, see Antonio Rizzi, Interpretazione e integrazione della legge uniâ¨forme sulla vendita internazionale di cose mobili, Rivista di dirittoâ¨privato 237, 283 (1997).
382 See Bammarny, supra note 237, at 165; Colligan, supra note 308, at 49;â¨Diesse, supra note 187, at 60 f.; Ferrari, Uniform Interpretation ofthe 1980â¨Uniform Sales Law, supra note 11, at 224 f.; Frignani, supra note 319, atâ¨308; Hackney, supra note 21, at 478; Hager, supra note 11, at 321; Harjani,â¨supra note 252, at 64; Honnold, supra note 222, at 139; Karollus, supraâ¨note 14, at 16 f.; Najork, supra note 14, at 99; Whittington, supra noteâ¨100, at 432; Witz et als., supra note 19, at 31. In recent case law, see OLG Koblenz, 24 February 2011, Internationales Hansdelsrecht 148, 156 (2012).
383 It is worth pointing out, that the CISG at times refers to the Standard ofâ¨"unreasonableness"; see Art. 86(2); Art. 87; Art. 88(1) and (2); in legalâ¨writing sse Adame Goddard, supra note 332, at 78; Ferrari, supra note 306, at 13 note 69.
384 See Art. 8(2); Art. 25; Art. 35(2)(b); Art. 60(a); Art. 79(1); Art. 85; 86(1); 88â¨(2).
385 See Art. 18(2); Art. 33(c); Art. 39(1); Art. 43(1); Art. 47(1); Art. 49(2)(a);â¨Art. 63(1); Art. 64(2)(b); Art. 65(1); Art. 65(2); Art. 75.
386 See Audit, supra note 14, at 51; Bammarny, supra note 237, at 164 f.;â¨Dejaco, supra note 14, at 44; Ferrari, supra note 359, at 464; Ferrari, supraâ¨note 22, at 181; Felemegas, supra note 11, at 285; Honnold, supra note 222,â¨at 140; Huber/Mullis, supra note 14, at 34; Janssen/Kiene, supra note 307, at 273 f.; Bertram Keller, Favor Contractus. Reading the CISG inâ¨Favor of the Contract, in Sharing International Commercialâ¨Law across National Boundaries, supra note 11,247,247 ff.; Peralesâ¨Viscasillas, supra note 14, at 138; Plantard, supra note 252, at 333; Rosenâ¨berg, supra note 12, at 452; Schwenzer/Hachem, supra note 24, at 35; inâ¨case law see American Arbitration Association, United States, OLG Köln,â¨14 October 2002, Internationales Handelsrecht 15 (2003); Bunâ¨desgericht, 28 October 1998, available on the Internet at http://cisgw3.â¨law.pace.edu/cases/981028sl.html.
387 Bonell, supra note 30, at 81; see also auch Achilles, supra note 14, atâ¨30-31; Burkart, supra note 29, at 197; Ferrari, supra note 22, at 181; inâ¨case law, see, apart from the decisions cited in the previous note, Arbitralâ¨award of 23 October 2007, available on the Internet at http://cisgw3.law.â¨pace.edu/cases/071023a5.html.
388 See Ferrari, supra note 22, at 181 note 315; Brigitta Lurger, Die wesentlicheâ¨Vertragsverletzung nach Art. 25 CISG, Internationales Handelsâ¨recht 91, 94, (2001); in case law see Oberster Gerichtshof, 23 Mayâ¨2005, Internationales Handelsrecht 165 (2005); Oberster Geâ¨richtshof, 7 September 2000, available on the Internet at http://cisgw3.â¨Iaw.pace.edu/cases/000907a3.html.
389 See Christoph Coen, Teilbeendigung von Verträgen wegen Leistungsstörâ¨ungen im Einheitsrecht, in Festschrift für Peter Schlechtriemâ¨zum 70. Geburtstag, supra note 11, 189, 200 f.; Ferrari, supra note 22,â¨at 182.
390 Kantonsgericht Schaffhausen, 25 February 2002, available on the Internetâ¨at http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/020225sl.html.
391 See Ferrari, supra note 22, at 182; Felix Hartmann, Ungeschriebene Zuâ¨rückbehaltüngsrechte im UN-Kaufrecht, Internationales Handelsâ¨recht 181, 183 f. (2006).
392 See Christiana Fountoulakis, Zurückbehaltungsrecht bei nicht ausgestellterâ¨Quittung im UN-Kaufrecht, Internationales Handelsrecht 244,â¨247 f. (2005); Hartmann, previous note, at 181; Damien Nyer, Withhold-â¨ing Performance for Breach in International Transactions: an Exercise inâ¨Equations, Proportions or Coercion?, 18 Pace Int'l L. Rev. 29, 72 ff.â¨(2006); Peter Schlechtriem, Subsequent Performance and Delivery Dead-â¨lines - Avoidance of CISG Sales Contracts Due to Non-conformity of theâ¨Goods, Pace Int'l L. Rev. 83,92 (2006); Teichert, supra note 12, at 33;â¨in case law see Supreme Court of Poland, 11 May 2007, available on theâ¨Internet at http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/070511pl.html; Obersterâ¨Gerichtshof, 8 November 2005, Internationales Handelsrecht 87â¨(2006); contra OLG Stuttgart, 20 December 2004, available on the Internetâ¨at http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/041220gl.html (stating that "[t]heâ¨CISG is not concerned with the right of retention. Whether such a rightâ¨exists at all is governed by the law applicable by virtue of the rules ofâ¨private international law").
393 See Peter Huber, Zug-um-Zug-Verurteilung, Annahmeverzug and UN-â¨Kaufrecht, Praxis des Internationalen Privat- und Verfahrensâ¨rechts 557 (2001); in case law see Oberster Gerichtshof, 30 Novemberâ¨2006, Internationales Handelsrecht 74 (2007); Oberster Gerichtsâ¨hof, 8 November 2005, Internationales Handelsrecht 87 (2006);â¨Tribunale di Padova, 25 February 2004, Internationales Handelsâ¨recht 31 (2005).
394 See Mauro Tescaro, II concorso tra i rimedi contrattuali di cui alla Con-â¨venzione di Vienna sulla vendita internazionale di beni mobile (CISG) e iâ¨rimedi domestici, Contratto e impresa/Europa 319, 337 f. (2007).
395 See also Ferrari, supra note 22, at 182.
396 OLG Düsseldorf, 2 July 1993, available on the Internet at http://cisgw3.law.â¨pace.edu/cases/930702gl.html.
397 Oberster Gerichtshof, 29 June 1999, available on the Internet at http://cisgâ¨w3.law.pace.edu/cases/990629a3.html; Cour d'appel Grenoble, 23 Octo-â¨ber 1996, available on the Internet at http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/961â¨023fl.html.
398 See Ferrari, supra note 22, at 182.
399 Cour d'appel Paris, 14 January 1998, available on the Internet at http://cisgâ¨w3.law.pace.edu/cases/980114fl.html.
400 See Ferrari, supra note 22, at 182.
401 See, e.g, Schwenzer/Hachem, supra note 24, at 138.
402 See Bazinas, supra note 11, at 26; Franco Ferrari, Art. 4, in Kommentarâ¨zum Einheitlichen UN-Kaufrecht - CISG, supra note 22, 109,125;â¨Peter Huber, Some Introductory Remarks to the CISG, Internationalesâ¨Handelsrecht 228, 234 (2006); Andre Janssen, The Application oftheâ¨CISG in Dutch Courts, in Quo Vadis CISG?, supra note 68, 129, 134;â¨Müller, supra note 100, at 32; Burghard Piltz, Neue Entwicklungen imâ¨UN-Kaufrecht, Neue Juristische Wochenschrift 553, 556 (2000);â¨Ingo Saenger, Art. 4 CISG, in Internationales Vertragsrecht, supraâ¨note 14, 417, 424-425; Ingo Saenger & Elisabeth Saufhoff, Die Aufrechâ¨nung im Anwendungsbereich des CISG, Internationales Handelsâ¨recht 189, 190 (2005); Harm Peter Westermann, Art. 4 CISG, inâ¨Münchener Kommentar zum Bürgerlichen Gesetzbuch, supraâ¨note 218, 2174, 2181; Witz et als., supra note 19, at 65.
403 See Tribunal cantonal du Valais, 27 May 2005, available on the Internet atâ¨http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/050527sl.html; Tribunal cantonal duâ¨Valais, 19 August 2003, available on the Internet at http://cisgw3.law.pace.â¨edu/cases/030819sl.html; Juzgado Comercial No. 26 Secretaria No. 51,â¨Buenos Aires, 2 July 2003, available on the Internet at http://cisgw3.law.â¨pace.edu/cases/030702al.html; Juzgado Comercial No. 26 Secretariaâ¨No. 52, Buenos Aires, 17 March 2003, available on the Internet at http://â¨cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/030317al.html; Oberster Gerichtshof, 22 Oc-â¨tober 2001, Internationales Handelsrecht 24 (2002); Tribunalâ¨Cantonal du Valais, 30 June 1998, available on the Internet at http://cisgâ¨w3.law.pace.edu/cases/980630sl.html; Handelsgericht des Kantons Zürâ¨ich, 30 November 1998, available on the Internet at http://cisgw3.law.pace.â¨edu/cases/981130sl.html; contra Kammergericht Berlin, 24 January 1994,â¨available on the Internet at http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/940124gl.â¨html; see, however, LG Berlin, 24 March 1998, available on the Internetâ¨at http://www.unilex.info/case.cfm?pid= 1 &do=case&id=440&step=FullTâ¨ext, stating that only a minority view holds that the Convention deals withâ¨the issue implicitly, i.e., by referring to the currency of the place of payâ¨ment of the price.
404 See Bundesgerichtshof, 23 June 2010, available on the Internet at http://â¨www.globalsaleslaw.com/content/api/cisg/urteile/2129.pdf; Appellationsâ¨gericht Basel-Stadt, 26 September 2008, Internationales Handelsâ¨recht 164 (2009); OLG Köln, 19 May 2008, Internationales Hanâ¨delsrecht 26, 26-27 (2010); Monomeies Protodikio Thessalonikis,â¨Greece, docket No. 43945/2007 (no date indicated), abstract availableâ¨on the Internet at http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/080002gr.html; OLGâ¨Köln, 13 February 2006, Internationales Handelsrecht 145 (2006);â¨Handelsgericht Zürich, 22 December 2005, Internationales Hanâ¨delsrecht 161 (2006); OLG Linz, 23 March 2005, Internationalesâ¨Handelsrecht 123 (2007); OLG Stuttgart, 20 December 2004, availableâ¨on the Internet at http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/041220gl.html; OLGâ¨Düsseldorf, 22 July 2004. OLG München, 15 September 2004, Internationales Handelsrecht 29 (2005); Bundesgericht, 7 July 2004, Internationales Handelsrecht 252 (2004); Tribunale di Padova, 25 February 2004, Internationales Handelsrecht 31 (2005); LG Bielefeld, 12 December 2003, available on the Internet at http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/031212gl. html; OLG Düsseldorf, 25 July 2003, available on the Internet at http:// cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/030725gl.html; LG Mönchengladbach, 15 July 2003, Internationales Handelsrecht 229 (2003); Bundesgerichtshof, 9 January 2002, Internationales Handelsrecht 16 (2002); Oberster Gerichtshof, 22 October 2001, Internationales Handelsrecht 24 (2002); Chamber of National and International Arbitration of Milan, Arbitral award of 28 September 2001, available on the Internet at http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/010928i3.html; OLG Köln, 28 May 2001, Internationales Handelsrecht 21 (2002); Tribunale di Vig-evano, 12 July 2000, available on the Internet at http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/ cases/000712i3.html; OLG München, 11 March 1998, available on the Internet at http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/980311gl.html; Kantonsgericht Freiburg, 23 January 1998, available on the Internet at http://cisgw3.law. pace.edu/cases/980123sl.html; LG Hagen, 15 October 1997, available on the Internet at http://www.jura.uni-freiburg.de/iprl/cisg/; LG München, 6 May 1997, available on the Internet at http://www.jura.uni-freiburg.de/ iprl/cisg/urteile/text/341.htm; contra Kantongsgericht Zug, 14 December 2009, available on the Internet at http://globalsaleslaw.com/content/api/ cisg/urteile/2026.pdf; (applying the CISG to set-off where the monetary claims of both parties were based on contracts subject to the CISG); LG Stuttgart, 29 October 2009, available on the Internet at http://cisgw3.law. pace.edu/cases/091029gl.html (same); Amtsgericht Duisburg, 13 April 2000, available on the Internet at http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/000413 gl.html (same) OLG München, 9 July 1997, available on the Internet at http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/970709gl.html (same).
405 See Ferrari, supra note 401, at 125.
406 See, e. g., Foreign Trade Court of Arbitration attached to the Serbianâ¨Chamber of Commerce, Arbitral award of 21 February 2005, availableâ¨on the Internet at http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/050221sb.html; Ber-â¨zirksgericht der Sänne, 20 February 1997, available on the Internet atâ¨http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/970220sl.html; ICC Court of Arbitraâ¨tion, Arbitral award no. 6653, available on the Internet at http://cisgw3.â¨law.pace.edu/cases/936653il.html.
407 See Huber, supra note 205, at 479 f.; Max Hutter, Die Haftung desâ¨Verkäufers für Nichtlieferung bzw. Lieferung vertragsâ¨widriger Ware nach dem Wiener UNCITRAL- Übereinkommen ÜBER INTERNATIONALE WARENKAUFVERTRÄGE VOM 11 APRIL 1980 54 (Diss. Regensburg 1988); Rosett, supra note 192, at 281; Gritli Ryffel, Die Schadenersatzhaftung des Verkäufers nach dem Wiener Übereinkommen über internationale Warenkaufverträge vom 11.4.1980 59 (Peter Lang: Frankfurt 1992).
408 ee Franco Ferrari, Ausschluss des UN-Kaufrechts, Rügefrist und Beweisâ¨last in einem italienischen Urteil zum deutsch-italienischen Rechtsverkehr,â¨Praxis des Internationalen Privat- und Verfahrensrechts 354 (2001); Franco Ferrari, Bürden of Proof under the CISG, Rev. CISG 1 (2000); Franco Ferrari, Charge de la preuve dans la Convention des Na-tions Unies sur le contrat de vente internationale de marchandises (CVIM), Revue de droit des affaires internationales/International Business Law Journal 665 (2000).
409 In legal writing, see, e.g., Joachim Aue, Mängelgewährleistung imâ¨UN-Kaufrecht unter besonderer Berücksichtigung stillâ¨schweigender Zusicherungen 100 ff. (Peter Lang: Frankfurt 1989);â¨Kazuaki Sono, Art. 44, in Commentary on the International Salesâ¨Law, supra note 30, at 324, 327; Herber/Czerwenka, supra note 27, atâ¨32 f.; Reinhard Jung, Die Beweislastverteilung im UN-Kaufâ¨recht insbesondere bei Vertragsabschluss, bei Vertragsverâ¨letzungen des Käufers, bei allgemeinen Bestimmungen sowieâ¨bei gemeinsamen Bestimmungen über Verkäufer- und Käuâ¨ferpflichten 40 (Peter Lang: Frankfurt 1996); Ulrich Magnus, C7SGâ¨in the German Federal Civil Courts, in Quo Vadis CISG?, supra noteâ¨68, at 211, 216 ff.; Ulrich Magnus, Das UN-Kaufrecht - aktuelle Entwickâ¨lungen und Rechtsprechungspraxis, Zeitschrift für Europäischesâ¨Privatrecht 523, 530 (2002); Florian Mohs, Anmerkung zu BG, 13.11. Internationales Handelsrecht 219 (2004); Birgit Reim-ers-Zocher, Beweislastfragen im Haager und Wiener Kaufrecht 148 (Peter Lang: Frankfurt 1995); Saenger, supra note 401, at 417; Teichert, supra note 12, at 16; in case law, see Tribunal Cantonal du Valais, 28 January 2009, available on the Internet at http://cisgw3.law. pace.edu/cases/090128sl.html; Kantonsgericht Nidwaiden, 23 May 2005, Internationales Handelsrecht 253 (2005); Tribunal cantonal du Valais, 27 May 2005 available on the Internet at http://cisgw3.law. pace.edu/cases/050527sl.html; Bundesgericht, 7 July 2004, Internationales Handelsrecht 252 (2004); Appelationshof Bern, 11 February Internationales Handelsrecht 149 (2006); Bundesgerichtshof, 9 January 2002, Internationales Handelsrecht 16 (2002); Tribunale di Vigevano, 12 July 2000, available on the Internet at http://cisg w3.law.pace.edu/cases/000712i3.html; Tribunale di Pavia, 29 December 1999, available on the Internet at http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/9912 29i3.html; Handelsgericht des Kantons Zürich, 10 February 1999, available on the Internet at http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/990210sl.html; Handelsgericht des Kantons Zürich, 26 April 1995, http://cisgw3.law.pa ce.edu/cases/950426sl.html; Handelsgericht des Kantons Zürich, 9 September 1993, available on the Internet at http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/ 930909sl.html.
410 See Tribunale di Vigevano, 12 July 2000, available on the Internet at http://â¨cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/000712i3.html; Bundesgerichtshof, 9 January 2002, Internationales Handelsrecht 16 (2002); Tribunale di Pavia,â¨29 December 1999, available on the Internet at http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/â¨cases/991229i3.html.
411 For references to this general principle in case law, see See Oberster Geâ¨richtshof, 14 February 2012, Internationales Handelsrecht 193,196â¨(2012); Tribunal Cantonal du Valais, 28 January 2009, available on theâ¨Internet at http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/090128sl.html; Tribunalâ¨Cantonal du Valais, 27 April 2007, available on the Internet at http://â¨cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/070427sl.html; Bundesgericht, 13 November 2003, Internationales Handelsrecht 215 (2004); Bundesgerichtsâ¨hof, 9 January 2002, Internationales Handelsrecht 16 (2002); Triâ¨bunale di Vigevano, 12 July 2000, available on the Internet at http://cisgâ¨w3.law.pace.edu/cases/000712i3.html; LG Frankfurt, 6 July 1994, availâ¨able on the Internet at http://www.jura.uni-freiburg.de/iprl/cisg/; OLGâ¨Innsbruck, 1 July 1994, available on the Internet at http://cisgw3.law.pace.â¨edu/cases/940701a3.html.
412 See Ferrari, supra note 402, at 129-130; Graffi, supra note 273, at 244;â¨Jung, supra note 409, at 44; Ulrich Magnus, Stand und Entwicklung desâ¨UN-Kaufrechts, Zeitschrift für Europäisches Privatrecht 202,â¨207 (1995); Müller, supra note 100, at 36.
413 See Tribunal Cantonal du Valais, Switzerland, 28 January 2009, availableâ¨on the Internet at http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/090128sl.html; Bunâ¨desgericht, 13 November 2003, Internationales Handelsrecht 215â¨(2004); Tribunale di Vigevano, 12 July 2000, available on the Internet atâ¨http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/000712i3.html.
414 Tribunale di Vigevano, 12 July 2000, available on the Internet at http://cisgâ¨w3.law.pace.edu/cases/000712i3.html.