CISG CASE PRESENTATION

France: Court of Appeal of Amiens 30 January 2001

Case Law on UNCITRAL texts (CLOUT) abstract no. 399

Reproduced with permission from UNCITRAL

During the summer of 1996, the company Vergers de Seru, fruit and vegetable wholesalers established in France, bought several tons of apples and pears from a producer established in Belgium. Several successive contracts were concluded for this purpose. When the buyer paid the invoices only partially on the grounds that the fruit delivered was not in conformity with the order, the seller sued the buyer for the payment of the remaining invoices before the Commercial Court of Saint Quentin in April 1998. Having before it a principal appeal lodged by the seller and a cross-appeal from the buyer, the Court of Appeal, in an interim decision, ruled on the applicable law. The seller invoked the applicability of Belgian law whereas the buyer argued for French law. In its decision, the Court noted that the contracts signed contained no provision indicating the applicable law. The appeal judges then referred to the CISG. They noted that the Convention “has the purpose of establishing uniform rules for sales of goods as between parties having their establishments in different countries”, that it “governs the rights and obligations created by an international contract for the sale of goods between the seller and the buyer” and that it had been ratified both by France and by Belgium. However, the appeal judges did not mention the date of entry into force of CISG in Belgium (1 November 1997) or take into account article 100 CISG, decisive in the case in point in view of the fact that the contracts were concluded before the entry into force of CISG in Belgium. The judges then noted that the documents communicated did not show that the parties intended to exclude application of the Vienna Convention, and accordingly invited the parties to make new submissions and to provide all factual and legal evidence relating to the applicability of the Vienna Convention to the present dispute and the resulting legal consequences.

The Court of Appeal is therefore due to take a second decision relating to the substance of the case.