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

Switzerland 26 July 2007 Canton Appellate Court Jura (Industrial furnace case)
[Cite as: http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/070726s1.html]

Primary source(s) of information for case presentation: CISG-online.ch website

Case Table of Contents


Case identification

DATE OF DECISION: 20070726 (26 July 2007)

JURISDICTION: Switzerland

TRIBUNAL: Tribunal cantonal [Appellate Court] du Jura

JUDGE(S): Gérard Piquerez (président); Daniel Logos, Pierre Broglin (juges)

CASE NUMBER/DOCKET NUMBER: I.37/04

CASE NAME: Unavailable

CASE HISTORY: Unavailable

SELLER'S COUNTRY: Switzerland

BUYER'S COUNTRY: Germany

GOODS INVOLVED: Industrial furnace


UNCITRAL case abstract

SWITZERLAND: Cantonal Court of the Jura, 26 July 2007 (Kickboards, scooters case)

Case law on UNCITRAL texts [A/CN.9/SER.C/ABSTRACTS/93],
CLOUT abstract no. 937

Reproduced with permission of UNCITRAL

Abstract prepared by Thomas M. Mayer

The dispute concerned the sale of an industrial furnace for thermal processing. The German buyer rescinded the contract and sued the seller, based in the Jura, for restitution of the advance payments made and for damages. In that connection, it adduced a whole series of defects.

The court observed that the right of avoidance of a contract was subject to the existence of a fundamental breach of contract, within the meaning of article 25 CISG; in the course of detailed deliberations, it defined the conditions that had to be fulfilled for such a breach to have been committed.

The court acknowledged only one of the alleged defects; some areas of the furnace did not comply with European safety standards in regard to contact with heated surfaces. However, it ruled that that defect did not constitute a fundamental breach, concluding that it was possible to make a correction, specifically by installing additional protection, namely metal sheeting, the cost of which was not high. That minor defect, which could readily be made good at little expense, was not such as to affect the essential substance of the contract or seriously jeopardize the economic object pursued by the parties. Thus the court did not acknowledge the buyer's right of avoidance of the contract and it dismissed the buyer's claim.

Go to Case Table of Contents

Classification of issues present

APPLICATION OF CISG: [-]

APPLICABLE CISG PROVISIONS AND ISSUES

Key CISG provisions at issue: Articles 25 ; 49 ; 74 ; 78 ; 81

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-online.ch website <http://www.globalsaleslaw.com/content/api/cisg/urteile/1723.pdf>; SZIER (2008) 192-193

Translation: Unavailable

CITATIONS TO COMMENTS ON DECISION

Unavailable

Go to Case Table of Contents
Pace Law School Institute of International Commercial Law - Last updated October 22, 2010
Comments/Contributions
Go to Database Directory || Go to CISG Table of Contents || Go to Case Search Form || Go to Bibliography