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

Austria 16 September 2002 Appellate Court Graz (Garments case)
[Cite as: http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/020916a3.html]

Primary source(s) of information for case presentation: UNCITRAL abstract

Case Table of Contents


Case identification

DATE OF DECISION: 20020916 (16 September 2002)

JURISDICTION: Austria

TRIBUNAL: Oberlandesgericht [Appellate Court] Graz

JUDGE(S): Unavailable

CASE NUMBER/DOCKET NUMBER: 2 R 62/02h

CASE NAME: Austrian case citations do not generally identify parties to proceedings

CASE HISTORY: Unavailable

SELLER'S COUNTRY: Austria (plaintiff)

BUYER'S COUNTRY: Germany (defendant)

GOODS INVOLVED: Garments


Case abstract

AUSTRIA: Oberlandesgericht Graz 16 September 2002

Case law on UNCITRAL texts (CLOUT) abstract no. 540

Reproduced with permission from UNCITRAL

Abstract prepared by Martin Adensamer, National Correspondent

A German buyer purchased garments from an Austrian seller, but did not take delivery of the goods. After requesting the buyer by fax and telephone to take possession, the seller sold the goods to other buyers at a significantly lower price and sued the first buyer to recover the difference between the original agreed price and the actual price the seller had received.

The Court of Appeal found that, as the buyer was in unreasonable delay in taking possession of the goods, the seller was entitled under article 88 CISG to sell the goods elsewhere. The Court found that the seller had complied with his duty to give proper notice to the buyer of its intention to sell the goods by fax and telephone. The Court also found that the fourteen days term indicated by the seller to the buyer to take possession of the goods was reasonable within the meaning of article 88 CISG. Finally, the Court stated that the fact that the fax, although sent to the correct number, might have failed to actually reach the buyer did not deprive the seller of the right to rely on the communication under article 27 CISG.

Go to Case Table of Contents

Classification of issues present

APPLICATION OF CISG: Yes

APPLICABLE CISG PROVISIONS AND ISSUES

Key CISG provisions at issue: Articles 27 ; 75 ; 88

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 (German): Unavailable

Translation: Unavailable

CITATIONS TO COMMENTS ON DECISION

Unavailable

Go to Case Table of Contents
Pace Law School Institute of International Commercial Law - Last updated February 15, 2006
Comments/Contributions
Go to Database Directory || Go to CISG Table of Contents || Go to Case Search Form || Go to Bibliography