Belgium 11 September 2003 Appellate Court Gent (Digital archive case)
[Cite as: http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/030911b1.html]
DATE OF DECISION:
JURISDICTION:
TRIBUNAL:
JUDGE(S):
CASE NUMBER/DOCKET NUMBER: 2002/AR/2233
CASE NAME:
CASE HISTORY: 1st instance Rb Gent 11 September 2002
SELLER'S COUNTRY: Netherlands (defendant)
BUYER'S COUNTRY: Belgium (plaintiff)
GOODS INVOLVED: Digital archive
APPLICATION OF CISG: Yes
APPLICABLE CISG PROVISIONS AND ISSUES
Key CISG provisions at issue:
Classification of issues using UNCITRAL classification code numbers:
Descriptors:
Overview comments (CISG-Belgium database): "Jurisdiction – Brussels Convention – art. 17 – no valid forum clause. Jurisdiction – Brussels Convention – art. 5(1) – place of delivery – Gent – according to contract – not necessary to apply CISG art. 31 – court has jurisdiction. Non-conformity – price should be paid back including damages. Interest – Belgian interest since this is what buyer would have got on money."
Go to Case Table of Contents
CITATIONS TO ABSTRACTS OF DECISION
(a) UNCITRAL abstract: Unavailable
(b) Other abstracts
Unavailable
CITATIONS TO TEXT OF DECISION
Original language (Dutch): CISG-Belgium database of Katholieke Universiteit Leuven <http://www.law.kuleuven.ac.be/ipr/eng/cases/2003-09-11.html>
Translation: Unavailable
CITATIONS TO COMMENTS ON DECISION
Unavailable
Go to Case Table of Contents
Pace Law School
Institute of International Commercial Law - Last updated March 4, 2004