Serbia 12 April 2002 Foreign Trade Arbitration Court attached to the Yugoslav Chamber of Commerce in Belgrade, Serbia (Sliced timber case) [translation available]
[Cite as: http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/020412sb.html]
DATE OF DECISION:
CASE NUMBER/DOCKET NUMBER: T-17/01
CASE HISTORY: Unavailable
SELLER'S COUNTRY: Yugoslavia (Serbia) (Claimant)
BUYER'S COUNTRY: Czech Republic (Respondent)
GOODS INVOLVED: Sliced timber
APPLICATION OF CISG: Yes [Article 1(1)(a)]
APPLICABLE CISG PROVISIONS AND ISSUES
Key CISG provisions at issue:
Classification of issues using UNCITRAL classification code numbers:
59A [Payment due at time fixed or determinable by contract or Convention] 78A [Interest on delay in receiving price or any other sum in arrears]
59A [Payment due at time fixed or determinable by contract or Convention]
78A [Interest on delay in receiving price or any other sum in arrears]
CITATIONS TO ABSTRACTS OF DECISION
(a) UNCITRAL abstract: Unavailable
(b) Other abstracts
CITATIONS TO TEXT OF DECISION
Original language (Serbian): Summary of award prepared by Mirjana Cukavac, Secretary of the Foreign Trade Court of Arbitration attached to the Serbian Chamber of Commerce, and published in the journal Arbitraza no. 1 (2001) 96-97.
Translation (English): Text presented below
CITATIONS TO COMMENTS ON DECISION
Serbian:  Vladimir Pavic / Milena Djordjevic, Primena Becke konvencije u arbitraznoj praksi Spoljnotrgovinske arbitraze pri Privrednoj komori Srbije, Pravo i privreda br. 5-8/2008, cited at p. 577Go to Case Table of Contents
Queen Mary Case Translation Programme
Award of 12 April 2002 [Proceedings No. T -- 17/01]
Abstract prepared by Mirjana Cukavac, Secretary of the Foreign Trade
Court of Arbitration attached to the Serbian Chamber of Commerce and
Published in Serbian in the journal Arbitraza No. 1 (2001) 96-97
Translation [*] by Jovana Stevovic
Edited by Dr. Vladimir Pavic, Milena Djordjevic, LL.M. [**]
Claimant of Yugoslavia [Seller] vs. Respondent of Czech Republic [Buyer]
On 20 May 2000 the Buyer and the Seller concluded a contract for the export of sliced timber. After seven deliveries, the Seller ceased contract performance due to the fact that the Buyer did not fulfill its obligation to pay for the deliveries which were carried out within the time periods provided by the contract. Namely, the Buyer made just one single payment. The Seller requested in its claim the difference between the sum owed, specified in the invoice, and the sum which was actually paid together with interest on the non-paid sums, as well as interest on the money paid for the period of delay in payment of the said amount. The Arbitral Tribunal granted Seller's request.
From the statement of reasons
Application of the substantive law
11. In the determination of the applicable law according to the claim and pursuant to Article 46 paragraph 2 of the Rules of the Foreign Trade Court of Arbitration attached to the Serbian Chamber of Commerce (hereinafter the Rules), the Arbitral Tribunal concluded that the provisions contained in the UN Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods (Vienna 11 April 1980, hereinafter: the Vienna Convention) should be applied.
Namely, Article 1(1)(a) provides that:
"This Convention applies to contracts of sale of goods between parties whose places of business are in different States:
(a) When the States are Contracting States;"
The Arbitral Tribunal notes that Yugoslavia and the Czech Republic are both Contracting States to the Vienna Convention.
12. In the application of the Vienna Convention, the Arbitral Tribunal finds that the legal basis for the claim in regards to the obligation of the Buyer to pay the contract price is found in Article 59 which states:
"The buyer must pay the price on the date fixed by or determinable from the contract and this Convention without the need for any request or compliance with any formality on the part of the seller."
13. The Arbitral Tribunal finds that the legal basis for the claim in regards to the obligation to pay the interest for delay in payment is Article 78 of the Vienna Convention which states:
"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 recoverable under article 74."
Reasoning of the Arbitral Tribunal
28. From the contract, it can be concluded that the Seller was obliged to deliver the contracted goods which it did and which proved to be an undisputed fact after looking at the evidence brought forward during the proceedings - namely, the carrier's waybill.
29. It was also an undisputed fact that the Buyer failed to fulfill its obligation to pay for the delivered goods except for the one single payment in the amount of ... Deutsche Mark [DM]. According to the contract, the Buyer was obliged to pay for the received goods within a period of ten days from the time of delivery. The Arbitral Tribunal finds that, pursuant to Article 59 of the Vienna Convention, the Seller has the right to the payment of the sales prices since it fulfilled its obligation to make the agreed deliveries.
30. All time limits for payment of price for the delivered goods have expired. As the right to interest was not provided in the contract, the Seller requested in the claim to be paid "... the principle obligation with accrued interest ..." for each individual delivery. The Arbitral Tribunal has concluded that, in accordance with Article 78 of the Vienna Convention, the Seller is entitled to interest if the Buyer fails to pay the price. The Arbitral Tribunal determines the interest rate in respect to the domiciliary rate of the currency of payment specified in the Contract of 20 May 2000.
* All translations should be verified by cross-checking against the original text. For purposes of this translation, Claimant of Yugoslavia / Serbia is referred to as [Seller] and Respondent of Czech Republic is referred to as [Buyer].
** Jovana Stevovic is a student at the University of Belgrade Faculty of Law. Dr. Vladimir Pavic is an Assistant Professor in Private International Law and Arbitration, and Milena Djordjevic, LL.M. (U. of Pittsburgh) is a Lecturer in International Commercial Law at the University of Belgrade Faculty of Law.Go to Case Table of Contents