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

Belarus 4 February 2008 Economic Court of the City of Minsk (Wheat case)
[Cite as: http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/080204b5.html]

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

Case Table of Contents


Case identification

DATE OF DECISION: 20080204 (4 February 2008)

JURISDICTION: Belarus

TRIBUNAL: Economic Court of the City of Minsk

JUDGE(S): Unavailable

CASE NUMBER/DOCKET NUMBER: Unavailable

CASE NAME: Unavailable

CASE HISTORY: Unavailable

SELLER'S COUNTRY: Lithuania (Plaintiff)

BUYER'S COUNTRY: Belarus (Defendant)

GOODS INVOLVED: Wheat


UNCITRAL case abstract

BELARUS: Economic Court of the City of Minsk 4 February 2008

Case law on UNCITRAL texts [A/CN.9/SER.C/ABSTRACTS/96],
CLOUT abstract no. 962

Reproduced with permission of UNCITRAL

Abstract prepared by Viktor S. Kamenkov, National Correspondent

The plaintiff, a Lithuanian company, contracted to sell wheat to the defendant, a Belarusian company. The contract stipulated that any dispute should be litigated in the Republic of Belarus, but did not account for the applicable law to the transaction. The contract established that the payment of the goods should take place within 30 days of delivery and it included a penalty for late payment, amounting to 0.1 per cent of the purchase price per day late. The plaintiff delivered the goods, but, as acknowledged by the defendant, the payment was delayed. The plaintiff thus filed a suit at the defendant's place of business, claiming the payment of the penalty.

The court held that pursuant to the Agreement between the Republics of Belarus and Lithuania (signed in Vilnius on 20 October 1992) the rights and obligations of the parties to business transactions are governed by the law of the place of transaction. Since the contract at hand had been signed in Minsk, Republic of Belarus, Belarusian law applied to the dispute. The court further held that, pursuant to Articles 53 and 59 CISG, the defendant was obliged to pay the price within the time specified in the contract, which had not happened. The plaintiff was thus entitled to

the penalty for late payment. However, the court did not enforce the penalty clause in full: considering the relation between the consequences of the breach of obligation and the amount of penalty and referring to the provisions of the Belarusian Civil Code that authorize the judges to reduce penalties, the court decided to reduce the penalty due.

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 53 ; 59

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 (Russian): 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 November 30, 2010
Comments/Contributions
Go to Database Directory || Go to CISG Table of Contents || Go to Case Search Form || Go to Bibliography