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)


Greece 2005 Decision 165/2005 of the Single-Member Court of First Instance of Larissa [editorial analysis available]
[Cite as: http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/050165gr.html]

Primary source(s) of information for case presentation: Commentary by Eleni ervogianni

Case Table of Contents

Case identification

DATE OF DECISION: 2005 (2005)


TRIBUNAL: Single-Member Court of First Instance Larissa

JUDGE(S): Unavailable


CASE NAME: Unavailable

CASE HISTORY: Unavailable




Classification of issues present

APPLICATION OF CISG: Yes [Article 1(1)(a)]


Key CISG provisions at issue: Articles 7 ; 39 ; 78

Classification of issues using UNCITRAL classification code numbers:

7A2 ; 7A3 ; 7B1 [Principles of interpretation: uniformity in application of Convention; Observance of good faith; Materials for interpretation: case law and scholarly material];

39B4 [Agreement to notify seller of lack of conformity: relationship to statute of limitations / prescription period];

78B [Rate of interest: determined based on general principles of the Convention]

Descriptors: Internationality ; Good faith ; Statute of limitations ; Interest ; General principles

Go to Case Table of Contents

Editorial remarks

Excerpt from Eleni Zervogianni, "Greece", in: Franco Ferrari ed., The CISG and its Impact on National Legal Systems, Sellier European Law Publishers (2008) 172-174

"In this decision the court proceeded to the application of the CISG on the basis of Art. 1(1) lit. (a) CISG, since both parties were located in Contracting States of the CISG (Greece [seller]) and Yugoslavia [buyer]). The court explicitly referred to the autonomous interpretation of the CISG and stressed that according to Art. 28(1) of the Greek Constitution, the provisions of the CISG prevail over the provisions of domestic law. Next the court proceeded to the examination of two thorny issues: a) the interest rate on sums in arrears, which in the case in question were damages due because of breach of contract by the seller, and (b) the limitation period of the compensation claim of the buyer. More concretely:

      "As regards the interest rate, the Court of First Instance of Larissa ruled that, although Art. 78 CISG does not refer to the height of this rate, the matter is meant to be covered in accordance with the Convention. Hence in order to fill the gap the court sought for the general principles of the CISG (Art. 7(2) CISG) and came up the following result. A basic principle of the CISG is its uniform interpretation. In order to achieve this result, the issue in question should be decided on the basis of an independent criterion. Then the court opted for good faith as a criterion, noting that this principle ought to govern the international trade. On this premise it was decided that the crucial interest rate is the rate in the country of the creditor of the monetary obligation [in the specific case it was the buyer who claimed damages], since this is the interest rate he would be entitled to had he concluded a contract with a domestic seller. This issue had also been treated along the same lines in the decision 1114/2000 of the Single-Member Court of First Instance of Athens. On the contrary, according to the recent decision 43945/2007 of the Single-Member Court of First Instance of Thessaloniki, no general principle of the CISG may lead to a solution as to the height of the due interest rate and thus the issue should be decided in conformity with the law applicable by virtue of the rules of private international law.

      "After having dealt with the due interest rate, the Court of Larissa proceeded to the examination of the issue of due prescription of the buyer’s claims. The prescription of the claims is neither treated in the CISG directly, nor is there a general principle which could serve in the solution of this problem. Hence the court resorted to the conflict rules of the Rome Convention on the Applicable Law to Contractual Relations of 1980, and concluded that Greek law was applicable in the case in question. The next problem which the court had to face was the conciliation of the provision of Art. 39 CISG, according to which the buyer must notify the seller on the lack of conformity of the goods to the contract within two years from the date he was handed over the goods, and of Art. 554 CC ... according to which the buyer’s rights arising from a defect or lack of conceded quality of the product have to be exercised within six months. The court ruled that the period provided for in Art. 554 CC starts running after the buyer has notified the seller according to Art. 39 CISG. This decision took into consideration the argumentation of a relevant Swiss decision as documented in the Greek literature. However, the court deviated from it, adopting the German solution, which has also been seen in the literature as preferable." (citations omitted)

Go to Case Table of Contents

Citations to case abstracts, texts, and commentaries


(a) UNCITRAL abstract: Unavailable

(b) Other abstracts



Original language (Greek): Click here for Greek text; see also Legal Database Intracom Nomos 380226

Translation: Unavailable



Go to Case Table of Contents
Pace Law School Institute of International Commercial Law - Last updated November 16, 2009
Go to Database Directory || Go to CISG Table of Contents || Go to Case Search Form || Go to Bibliography