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

Russia 15 April 2011 Supreme Arbitration Court (or Presidium of Supreme Arbitration Court) of the Russian Federation
[Cite as: http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/110415r1.html]

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

Case Table of Contents


Case identification

DATE OF DECISION: 20110415 (15 April 2011)

JURISDICTION: Arbitration ; Russian Federation

TRIBUNAL: Vysshi Arbitrazhnyi Sud Rossyiskoi Federatsii [High Arbitration Court (or Presidium of Supreme Arbitration Court) of the Russian Federation]

JUDGE(S): Unavailable

CASE NUMBER/DOCKET NUMBER: VAS-2499/11

CASE NAME: Unavailable

CASE HISTORY: Unavailable

SELLER'S COUNTRY: Germany

BUYER'S COUNTRY: Russia

GOODS INVOLVED: Restaurant renovation materials


UNCITRAL case abstract

RUSSIAN FEDERATION: Judicial Division of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation (VAS)
Case No. VAS-2499/11 of 15 April 2011

Case law on UNCITRAL texts [A/CN.9/SER.C/ABSTRACTS/113],
CLOUT abstract no. 1106

Reproduced with permission of UNCITRAL

Abstract prepared by A. S. Komarov, National Correspondent, A. I. Muranov and N. S. Karetnaya

An agreement was signed between a German seller and a Russian buyer, which proposed the supply of three consignments of goods to two different States (the goods were described as materials for the renovation of a restaurant kitchen, materials for roofing a restaurant kitchen and materials for renovation of a restaurant). The agreement provided for different payment procedures for the different consignments. The buyer paid for only one consignment of goods, albeit before the agreement was signed.

The buyer sued the seller, claiming that the contract for international sale should be declared not concluded on the grounds that the parties had not agreed on the basic conditions of the contract.

The court upheld the claim in full. The higher courts upheld the decision of the court of first instance.

The respondent, claiming that the courts had incorrectly applied CISG, submitted a complaint to the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation, which likewise upheld the earlier decisions, on the following grounds.

Since the commercial enterprises of the parties were located in the Russian Federation and the Federal Republic of Germany, CISG must be applicable to the business relationship between them. The form of the contract for the international sale of goods was governed by Russian law, in view of the declaration made by the Russian Federation under article 96 CISG that such contracts must be put in writing.

Under the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, a contract is regarded as being concluded if the parties have reached agreement on all the essential terms of the contract, in the form required by the type of contract in question. The condition governing a contract for international sale shall be considered as being fulfilled if the contract allows the type of goods and their quantity to be determined, which also satisfies the requirements of articles 14 and 35 CISG.

The goods were not identified in the agreement (the type and quantity of goods were not indicated), i.e. the subject of the contract was not specified. Moreover, the letter from the Russian organization referred to by the seller does not contain specific details which might identify the type and quantity of goods, and there is accordingly no reason to consider that letter as an offer. The delivery which was paid for before the parties signed the above-mentioned agreement appears to be a one-off delivery, judging from the terms and method of delivery. The other deliveries did not take place, and the goods to be delivered were not specified by the parties. The agreement between the parties does not constitute an acceptance, given the actual circumstances of the case and the applicable law.

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 14 ; 35 ; 96

Classification of issues using UNCITRAL classification code numbers:

14 [Criteria for an Offer]

35A [Quality, quantity and description required by contract]

96 [Declaration Preserving Domestic Formalities: Written Form]

Descriptors: Offer ; Writing, definition of

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): online database of court judgements <http://kad.arbitr.ru>

Translation: Unavailable

CITATIONS TO COMMENTS ON DECISION

Unavailable

Go to Case Table of Contents
Pace Law School Institute of International Commercial Law - Last updated January 23, 2012
Comments/Contributions
Go to Database Directory || Go to CISG Table of Contents || Go to Case Search Form || Go to Bibliography