Go to Database Directory || Go to CISG Table of Contents || Go to Case Search Form || Go to Bibliography

CISG CASE PRESENTATION

France 11 February 2004 Supreme Court (Potato case)
[Cite as: http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/040211f1.html]

Primary source(s) of information for case presentation: CISG-France website

Case Table of Contents


Case identification

DATE OF DECISION: 20040211 (11 February 2004)

JURISDICTION: France

TRIBUNAL: Cour de cassation [Supreme Court]

JUDGE(S): M. Tricot (président)

CASE NUMBER/DOCKET NUMBER: 01-16736

CASE NAME: Société C v. Société M-V

CASE HISTORY: 1st instance [-]; 2d instance Cour d'appel Nimes 22 February 2001

SELLER'S COUNTRY: Algeria

BUYER'S COUNTRY: Algeria

GOODS INVOLVED: Potatoes


Case abstract

FRANCE: Cour de cassation 11 February 2004

Case law on UNCITRAL texts [A/CN./SER.C/ABSTRACTS/82],
CLOUT abstract no. 840

Reproduced with permission of UNCITRAL

Abstract prepared by Claude Witz, National Correspondent, and Mathieu Richard

The case involved two Algerian companies. It had been agreed by the parties that the seller company would supply the buyer with 100 tons of potatoes per week. Having supplied a certain number of potatoes during the course of two months, the seller informed the buyer that supplies would be suspended on the grounds of force majeure. It sought payment from the buyer for the outstanding invoices and issued a summons. The buyer made a counterclaim for compensation for damage suffered owing to the poor quality of the goods supplied, non-observance of the agreed quantities and the untimely termination of the contract.

The Nîmes Appeal Court, in a judgement issued on 22 February 2001, dismissed the buyer's claim for compensation for loss of profit, on the grounds that it had not submitted proof that the seller had unilaterally and improperly terminated the contract.

The Court of Cassation partially annulled the judgement dismissing the buyer's claim for compensation for loss of profit. The Appeal Court had held that the seller had not carried out its obligations and could not invoke force majeure, but the Court of Cassation ruled that the judges had not drawn the correct legal conclusions from their findings and had thus made an error in law concerning CISG article 74.

Go to Case Table of Contents

Classification of issues present

APPLICATION OF CISG: [-]

APPLICABLE CISG PROVISIONS AND ISSUES

Key CISG provisions at issue: Article 74

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-France website <http://witz.jura.uni-saarland.de/CISG/decisions/110204v.htm>; Légifrance: <http://www.legifrance.gouv.fr>

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 19, 2009
Comments/Contributions
Go to Database Directory || Go to CISG Table of Contents || Go to Case Search Form || Go to Bibliography