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

Switzerland 26 May 2000 Canton Appellate Court Vaud (Asphalt case)
[Cite as: http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/000526s1.html]

Primary source(s) of information for case presentation: CISG-online.ch website

Case Table of Contents


Case identification

DATE OF DECISION: 20000526 (26 May 2000)

JURISDICTION: Switzerland

TRIBUNAL: Tribunal cantonal [Appellate Court] Vaudu

JUDGE(S): M. de Montmollin (président); MM. Cottier et Genillard (juges)

CASE NUMBER/DOCKET NUMBER: 232/00/JGE

CASE NAME: Unavailable

CASE HISTORY: Unavailable

SELLER'S COUNTRY: Switzerland

BUYER'S COUNTRY: Brazil

GOODS INVOLVED: Bitumen (asphalt)


UNCITRAL case abstract

SWITZERLAND: Vaud Cantonal Court
[CA99.000456 (232/00/JGE)] 26 May 2000

Case law on UNCITRAL texts [A/CN.9/SER.C/ABSTRACTS/149],
CLOUT abstract no. 1404

Reproduced with permission of UNCITRAL

Abstract prepared by Thomas M. Mayer

The dispute concerned a contract between a Swiss seller and a buyer with its headquarters in Brazil for the delivery of 2,000 metric tons of bitumen from Singapore to Mombasa (Kenya). “Cost and Freight” (CFR, Incoterms 1990) delivery was agreed. The seller entrusted the transportation of the goods to an ocean carrier secured via an intermediary. When the ship arrived at Mombasa, a significant portion of the goods had spilled from the transport barrels. In fact, the ship did not have the technical capacity to transport such goods, and furthermore the weather conditions during the crossing were poor. The buyer’s insurer, subrogated to the rights of the buyer, claimed damages in court.

The court decided to apply the CISG (article 1(1)(b)). The choice of law clause in favour of Swiss Federal law contained in the contract did not require the exclusion of the CISG under article 6. The court therefore took into account the fact that, since the defendant’s headquarters were located in Lausanne, there existed a relevant connection with Switzerland. In the absence of indications to the contrary, the court deemed that the reference to Swiss law should be taken to include not only the Swiss Code of Obligations but also the CISG.

The court then considered the question of the extent of the seller’s obligations and the passing of risk. It noted that, under article 31(a) of the CISG, the seller must in principle hand over the goods to the first carrier. As delivery was subject, under the contract, to the Incoterm CFR, the defendant was obliged to arrange transportation and, under article 32(2) of the CISG, to ensure the chartering of a means of transport appropriate for this type of goods. The passing of risk nevertheless occurred at the time of handover of the goods to the first carrier, during which the goods were checked by a neutral body, which certified their quality. The defendant had therefore fulfilled its obligations as seller.

The court denied the liability of the defendant under the second part of article 66 of the CISG (and also implicitly under article 36(2)). It concluded that the defendant had fulfilled its obligations under article 32(2) of the CISG and could not be blamed for the choice of carrier or ship. The loading and securing of cargo was not the responsibility of the defendant. The application was therefore dismissed.

Go to Case Table of Contents

Classification of issues present

APPLICATION OF CISG: [-]

APPLICABLE CISG PROVISIONS AND ISSUES

Key CISG provisions at issue: Articles 6 ; 7(1) ; 31(1) ; 32(2) ; 66

Classification of issues using UNCITRAL classification code numbers:

Unavailable

Descriptors: Unavailable

Go to Case Table of Contents

Editorial remarks

Go to Case Table of Contents

Citations to other abstracts, case texts and commentaries

CITATIONS TO OTHER ABSTRACTS OF DECISION

Unavailable

CITATIONS TO TEXT OF DECISION

Original language (French): CISG-online.ch website <http://globalsaleslaw.com/content/api/cisg/urteile/1840.pdf>

Translation (Summary in German): Swiss Review of International and European Law (SRIEL), 1/2002, p. 146 ff.

CITATIONS TO COMMENTS ON DECISION

Unavailable

Go to Case Table of Contents
Pace Law School Institute of International Commercial Law - Last updated November 12, 2014
Comments/Contributions
Go to Database Directory || Go to CISG Table of Contents || Go to Case Search Form || Go to Bibliography