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

CISG CASE PRESENTATION

Switzerland 1 September 1993 Commercial Court Zürich (Kitchen spatulas case)
[Cite as: http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/930901s1.html]

Primary source(s) for case presentation: Michael R. Will


Case Table of Contents


Case identification

DATE OF DECISION: 19930901 (1 September 1993)

JURISDICTION: Switzerland

TRIBUNAL: HG Zürich [HG = Handelsgericht = Commercial Court]

JUDGE(S): Unavailable

CASE NUMBER/DOCKET NUMBER: HG 92493 U/HG 92

CASE NAME: Unavailable

CASE HISTORY: Unavailable

SELLER'S COUNTRY: Germany (plaintiff)

BUYER'S COUNTRY: Switzerland (defendant)

GOODS INVOLVED: Kitchen spatulas


Classification of issues present

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

APPLICABLE CISG PROVISIONS AND ISSUES

Key CISG provisions at issue: Articles 38(1) ; 39(1) ; 74 ; 78

Classification of issues using UNCITRAL classification code numbers:

Unavailable

Descriptors: Burden of proof ; Examination of goods ; Lack of conformity notice, specificity ; Interest

Go to Case Table of Contents


Editorial remarks

Go to Case Table of Contents


Citations to case abstracts, texts, and commentaries

CITATIONS TO ABSTRACTS OF DECISION

(a) UNCITRAL abstract: Unavailable

(b) Other abstracts

German: Schweizerische Zeitschrift für Internationales und Europäisches Recht (SZIER) / Revue suisse de droit international et de droit européen (1995) 278

CITATIONS TO TEXT OF DECISION

Original language (German): Unavailable

Translation: Unavailable

CITATIONS TO COMMENTS ON DECISION

English: Behr, 17 Journal of Law and Commerce (1998) 266-288 [abstracts and comments on 29 interest rulings from 10 countries (this case presented at 275-276: "In this Swiss-German sale of home appliances at a price of 30,171.70 German Marks, CISG was applied without discussion (Article 1(1)(a)?). An unidentified seller, probably German, because the price is fixed in German Marks, claimed the price plus 13.5% interest. The buyer counterclaimed for a reduction of price and only 6% interest. The court decided: 'The amount of damages of 13.5%, which is claimed by plaintiff, is unquestioned by defendant. Thus the claim is valid.' ")

Go to Case Table of Contents
Pace Law School Institute of International Commercial Law - Last updated February 5, 2002
Comments/Contributions
Go to Database Directory || Go to CISG Table of Contents || Go to Case Search Form || Go to Bibliography