Source: http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/090115k1.html
Timestamp: 2017-04-24 22:56:59
Document Index: 695642825

Matched Legal Cases: ['art 1', 'art 3', 'art 4', 'art 1', 'art 1', 'art 2', 'art 2', 'art 1', 'art 1', 'art 1', 'art 1']

Slovak Republic 15 January 2009 District Court in Nitra [translation available] Go to Database Directory || Go to CISG Table of Contents || Go to Case Search Form || Go to Bibliography Search the entire CISG Database (case data + other data) CISG CASE PRESENTATION
Slovak Republic 15 January 2009 District Court in Nitra [translation available] [Cite as: http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/090115k1.html] Primary source(s) of information for case presentation: Case text
DATE OF DECISION: 20090115 (15 January 2009) JURISDICTION: Slovak Republic TRIBUNAL: District Court in Nitra JUDGE(S): Bozena Csibranyiova CASE NUMBER/DOCKET NUMBER: 27Cb/101/2007
Plaintiff T.I., S.r.o. [Plaintiff], with its registered office in N.P., Czech Republic, represented by attorney
JUDr. M.J., versus Defendant Ing. D.A., sole entrepreneur [Buyer], with its place of business in Š.
___, N. [Slovak Republic], regarding payment of 40,000.- Czech koruna [Kc] and appurtenances
[Buyer] is obliged to pay to [Plaintiff] the sum of 49,569.78 Kc within three days after the judgment
comes into force. [Buyer] is obliged to pay to [Plaintiff] a sum of 255.33 Euro [EUR] as a reimbursement of costs of
the proceedings within three days after the judgment comes into force on the account of legal counsel of
[Plaintiff].
The court stays the proceedings with respect to claim for interest from the sum of 40,000.- Kc for
the period from 23 October 2008 until payment. [Buyer] has no right to reimbursement of costs of the proceedings. REASONING Czech corporation T.L., a.s., [Seller], with its registered office in H. X___, T, Czech Republic, claimed
in the proceedings by its action filed with the court on 25 January 2007 its right to payment of 40,000.-
Kc and default interest from the sum of 65,567.- Kc for the period from 20 May 2006 until payment.
The interest rate was based on the repo rate set by the Czech National Bank increased by 7%, which
will change for each calendar half-year depending on the actual interest rate applicable on the first day
of the particular half-year.
[Seller] has its registered office in the Czech Republic. [Buyer] has its registered office in Slovakia. This
constitutes a relationship with an international aspect. The court therefore at first had to qualify
jurisdiction of Slovak courts and the law applicable to the relationship. Under sec. 1 of act no. 97/1963 Coll. on international private and procedural law as amended, this act
prescribes which law is applicable to civil, commercial, labor and other relationships with international
aspect, prescribes legal status of foreigners and prescribes the Slovak judicial authorities' procedure for
regulating and deciding these relationships and thereby promoting international cooperation. Under sec. 9 part 1 of act no. 97/1963 Coll. on international private and procedural law as amended,
parties to a contract may choose the law which will govern their mutual proprietary matters; even
without express declaration, if there is no doubt about the will of the parties.
Under sec. 10 part 3 of this act, contractual relationships, if not otherwise prescribed in another legal
instrument, will be governed by the law of the state where both parties have their places of business; if
there is no such state and the contract is concluded in the presence of both parties, the contract will be
governed by the law of the state where the contract was concluded; if the contract was not concluded
in the presence of both parties, it will be governed by the law of the place of business of the party which
accepted a proposal for concluding a contract.
Under sec. 37 of this act, if not otherwise stipulated in subsequent provisions, and if the action is filed
against a person who is domiciled or has a place of business in Slovakia, or who has property in
Slovakia if the action is concerning proprietary matters, then Slovak courts have jurisdiction to try and
Under sec. 37a letter d) of this act, Slovak courts may also have jurisdiction to try and decide the case
if it concerns types of contracts where the goods were delivered or the services were provided in
Slovakia, or if the place of performance of the contract was in Slovakia.
With reference to the abovementioned sections 37 and 37a of the act no. 99/1963 Coll. on international
private and procedural law, the courts of the Slovak Republic have jurisdiction to try the case.
Under sec. 48 of this act, Slovak courts try the case in accordance with Slovak procedural law and all
parties to the dispute are equal in the proceedings. Under sec. 84 of the Slovak Civil Procedure Code (hereinafter referred to as "CPC"), the universal
Under sec. 85 part 4 of the CPC, the universal court of the defendant in commercial matters is the
court where the defendant has its registered office, or if there is no such court, where the defendant has
its place of business. If the defendant has no such place of business, the universal court of the defendant
is the court where the defendant has its residence. [Buyer] has its registered office in Slovakia, in the circuit of the District Court in Nitra. Therefore, the
case shall be tried and decided by the District Court in Nitra.
After the proceedings began, a petition of bankruptcy was filed against [Seller] by a resolution of the
Regional Court in Hradec Kralove, Czech Republic, rec. no. 42 K 12/2007-209 from 15 March 2007
and the court appointed Mgr. S.K. as its receiver in bankruptcy.
Under sec. 14 part 1 letter c) of act no. 328/91 Coll. on bankruptcy and repayment, judicial and other
proceedings which are dealing with property forming assets in bankruptcy or with claims referring to
these assets, the receiver in bankruptcy can file or initiate such proceedings, or proceedings can be
initiated against the receiver and in case of claims specified in sec. 20, these proceedings can also be
initiated in accordance with sec. 23 and 24. Under sec. 14 part 1 letter g) of act no. 328/91 Coll. on bankruptcy and repayment, all claims and
bankruptcy. With reference to the abovementioned, the court considered Mgr. S.K., [Seller]'s receiver in
bankruptcy, to be acting as the plaintiff, since the receiver asked to continue in the proceedings by his
motion from 19 December 2007.
The court replaced Mgr. S.K., [Seller]'s receiver in bankruptcy [Plaintiff], with its registered office in
N. P., ___, P. - N.M., Czech Republic, … [Seller] in a position of plaintiff by its resolution from 16
January 2008, rec. no. 27 Cb 101/2007-64 which came into force on 25 March 2008.
[Plaintiff] therefore claims the sum with appurtenances, on the basis of assignment of the claim from
[Seller], whereby [Plaintiff] entered into the legal position of a seller in the contract.
The court duly summoned the parties to the hearing, ordered on 15 January 2009, but neither [Plaintiff],
nor its legal counsel, nor [Buyer] appeared before the court. [Buyer] did not excuse his absence and
did not ask for adjournment of the proceedings. [Plaintiff] apologized for its absence at the court
proceedings via its legal counsel in a letter dated 7 January 2009 and did not ask for adjournment of the
proceedings. The court with reference to sec. 101 part 2 of the CPC therefore tried and decided the
case in the absence of the parties.
Under sec. 101 part 2 of the CPC the court may continue the proceedings in the case of inactivity of
parties to the dispute. If the party duly summoned to the proceedings does not appear before the court
and did not ask for adjournment for serious reasons, the court can try and decide the case in absence of
the parties, taking court records and gathered evidence into consideration.
The court gathered evidence by reading submitted documents provided by [Seller] and thereby
investigated this factual situation and qualified it under applicable legal provisions. [Seller], the initial plaintiff, claimed its right to payment of the purchase price under oral contract of sale,
where it delivered goods to [Buyer]. As already mentioned, [Plaintiff] succeeded into the rights and
obligations of [Seller]. From the gathered evidence, the court determined that [Seller] fulfilled its duties
under the contract of sale and delivered the goods to [Buyer]. It claimed the right for payment of the
purchase price in amount of 65,567.- Kc by invoice no. 50619022 due on 19 May 2005, which was
not yet partially by [Buyer] in the sum of 40,000.- Kc. [Buyer] never opposed the fact that the goods
were actually delivered to it. The court found no evidence that [Buyer] fulfilled its obligation to pay the
purchase price in its entirety. [Buyer] partially paid the invoice in amount of 25,567.- Kc. Under sec. 9 part 1 of act no. 97/1963 Coll. on international private and procedural law as amended,
parties to a contract may choose the law that will govern their mutual proprietary matters; even without
express declaration, if there is no doubt about the will of the parties.
Under sec. 11 of this act, the applicable law chosen by the parties also governs changes and securing of
obligations and effects of non-performance, unless another solution emerges from the character of the
frequently used type of contract used by merchants. Under this contract, the goods are transferred for
The legal regulation of sales contracts prescribed in the Slovak Commercial Code is analogous to
Notice of Ministry of Foreign Affairs no. 160/1991 Coll.) Both Slovakia and Czech Republic are
relationship. If they intend such exclusion, it is recommended to expressly prescribe that they exclude
application of the Vienna Convention or its particular provisions.
Convention. - Under article 4 of the Vienna Convention, this Convention governs only the formation of the
contract of sale and the rights and obligations of the seller and the buyer arising from such a contract. - Under article 78 of the Vienna Convention, if a party fails to pay the price or any other sum that
is in arrears, the other party is entitled to interest on it, without prejudice to any claim for damages
As it was already stated, the parties concluded a contract of sale under the Vienna Convention. The
initial plaintiff, [Seller], acting as a seller delivered to [Buyer] the goods ordered and [Buyer] was
obliged under article 55 of the Vienna Convention to pay the purchase price in accordance with the
contract, but it failed to do so. The court therefore upheld [Seller]'s claim as being justified. The court
also found that [Plaintiff] replaced the initial plaintiff, [Seller], in the proceedings. The court therefore
upheld [Plaintiff]'s claim. In the action, [Seller] also claimed its right to interest. The abovementioned Vienna Convention regulates the right to interest only with respect to its existence
Under sec. 10 part 1 of this act, if the parties have not made a choice of law, their contractual
of concluding of a contract. Under sec. 369 part 1 of the Commercial Code of the Czech Republic if a debtor is in default of
fulfillment of a monetary obligation or its part, and no rate for paying interest on the sum has been
provision is in the contract, at an interest rate prescribed by the rules of civil law. Under sec. 1 of the ordinance of the Czech Republic government no. 163/2005 Coll. which amends
Civil Code, the interest rate shall be the repo rate announced by the Czech National Bank increased by
7 percent. This interest rate in effect on the first day of a calendar half-year is in force for the whole
half-year. Since [Buyer] is in default of payment of the purchase price, the court granted [Plaintiff] right to
payment of interest in the amount prescribed by the abovementioned legal provisions, which are
The court decided the reimbursement of the costs of judicial proceedings under sec. 142 part 1 of the
CPC and granted a full reimbursement of the costs to [Seller], since [Seller] was successful in its entire
claim. [Seller] was granted the right for reimbursement of court fees for the action in amount of 3,012.-
Sk and reimbursement of legal aid in amount of 4,680.- Sk… Instruction: An appeal against this judgment must be filed with the Regional Court in Nitra via this court
within fifteen days of its receipt. District Court in Nitra, 15 January 2009 Mgr. Bozena Csibranyiova, Judge
translation, the initial Plaintiff of the Czech Republic is referred to as [Seller] and Defendant of the
Slovak Republic is referred to as [Buyer]. Amounts in the currency of the Czech Republic (Czech koruna) are indicated as [Kc]; amounts in the currency of the Slovak Republic (Slovak koruna) are indicated as [Sk].