CISG United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods (1980)
Int. Privat- & Wirtschaftsrecht
- The United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods provides a uniform text of law for international sales of goods. The Convention was prepared by the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL) and adopted by a diplomatic conference on 11 April 1980.
- Preparation of a uniform law for the international sale of goods began in 1930 at the International Institute for the Unification of Private Law (UNIDROIT) in Rome. After a long interruption in the work as a result of the Second World War, the draft was submitted to a diplomatic conference in The Hague in 1964, which adopted two conventions, one on the international sale of goods and the other on the formation of contracts for the international sale of goods.
- Almost immediately upon the adoption of the two conventions there was widespread criticism of their provisions as reflecting primarily the legal traditions and economic realities of continental Western Europe, which was the region that had most actively contributed to their preparation. As a result, one of the first tasks undertaken by UNCITRAL on its organization in 1968 was to enquire of States whether or not they intended to adhere to those conventions and the reasons for their positions. In the light of the responses received, UNCITRAL decided to study the two conventions to ascertain which modifications might render them capable of wider acceptance by countries of different legal, social and economic systems. The result of this study was the adoption by diplomatic conference on 11 April 1980 of the United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods, which combines the subject matter of the two prior conventions.
- UNCITRAL’s success in preparing a Convention with wider acceptability is evidenced by the fact that the original eleven States for which the Convention came into force on 1 January 1988 included States from every geographical region, every stage of economic development and every major legal, social and economic system. The original eleven States were: Argentina, China, Egypt, France, Hungary, Italy, Lesotho, Syria, United States, Yugoslavia and Zambia.
- As of 1 September 2010, 76 States are parties to the Convention. The current updated status of the Convention is available on the UNCITRAL website.1 Authoritative information on the status of the Convention, as well as on related declarations, including with respect to territorial application and succession of States, may be found on the United Nations Treaty Collection on the Internet.2
- The Convention is divided into four parts. Part One deals with the scope of application of the Convention and the general provisions. Part Two contains the rules governing the formation of contracts for the international sale of goods. Part Three deals with the substantive rights and obligations of buyer and seller arising from the contract. Part Four contains the final clauses of the Convention concerning such matters as how and when it comes into force, the reservations and declarations that are permitted and the application of the Convention to international sales where both States concerned have the same or similar law on the subject.
2http://treaties.un.org/.
UNCITRAL Digest CISG, Art. 5
This Digest of Case Law on the United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods (CISG) was prepared by the UNCITRAL Secretariat in cooperation with national correspondents and international experts. It may serve as a commentary on the CISG. The following excerpt contains the commentary on Article 5 CISG.
Recommended citation: UNCITRAL, Digest of Case Law on the United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods (2016), Art. 5, para. #.
1. Pursuant to this provision, the Convention does not deal with liability for death or personal injury caused by the goods to any person,1 regardless of whether the injured party is the buyer or a third party. Consequently, national law applies to those matters.
2. Article 5 declares that the Convention does not govern liability for death or personal injury “to any person”.2 Although this can be read to exclude a buyer’s claim against the seller for pecuniary loss resulting from the buyer’s liability to third parties for personal injury caused by the goods, one court has applied the Convention to such a claim.3
3. According to part of the case law, any claims for damage to property caused by non-conforming goods are governed by the Convention and do not fall within scope of the article 5 exclusion.4 This excludes any concurrent domestic remedies for damage to property. Consequently, in those cases where the Convention applies, it requires a buyer to notify the seller of the lack of conformity that caused the damage to property in order for the buyer not to lose its claim.5 Where the damage to property is not “caused by the goods”, as where the buyer’s property is damaged by delivery of the goods, the liability issue must be settled on the basis of applicable domestic law.
4. According to some courts, however, the Convention does not deal with concurrent tort claims6 or claims based on the seller’s negligent or fraudulent misrepresentation,7 thus not pre-empting any such claim, but rather leaving it to the applicable domestic law to determine the prerequisites of any such claim.
1 See CLOUT case No. 196 [Handelsgericht des Kantons Zürich, Switzerland, 26 April 1995] (see full text of the decision).
2 CLOUT case No. 196 [Handelsgericht des Kantons Zürich, Switzerland, 26 April 1995].
3 See CLOUT case No. 49 [Oberlandesgericht Düsseldorf, Germany, 2 July 1993] (see full text of the decision).
4 See CLOUT case No. 196 [Handelsgericht des Kantons Zürich, Switzerland, 26 April 1995].
5 See CLOUT case No. 280 [Thüringer Oberlandesgericht, Germany, 26 May 1998]; CLOUT case No. 196 [Handelsgericht des Kantons Zürich, Switzerland, 26 April 1995].
6 U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Arkansas, United States, 23 December 2009, available on the Internet at www.cisg.law.pace.edu; CLOUT Case No. 579 [U.S. Southern District Court for New York, United States, 10 May 2002]; CLOUT case No. 420 [U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Pennsylvania, United States, 29 August 2000].
7 U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Arkansas, United States, 23 December 2009, available on the Internet at www.cisg.law.pace.edu; U.S. District Court, Southern District of Ohio, United States, 26 March 2009, available on the Internet at www.cisg.law.pace.edu; U.S. District Court, Southern District of Ohio, United States, 10 October 2006, available on the Internet at www.cisg.law.pace.edu; CLOUT case No. 579 [U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York, United States, 10 May 2002].
© United Nations. This text is reproduced with permission of the United Nations.