Switzerland 9 October 1998 Appellate Court Genève (Shares of stock case) [translation available]
[Cite as: http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/981009s1.html]
DATE OF DECISIONS:
CASE NUMBER/DOCKET NUMBER: C/8157/1992; ACJC/1077/1998
CASE HISTORY: 1st instance Tribunal de Genève 10 September 1997
SELLER'S COUNTRY: Panama
BUYER'S COUNTRY: Great Britain
GOODS INVOLVED: Shares of stock
SWITZERLAND: Bezirksgericht der Saane (Zivilgericht) 20 February 1997
Case law on UNCITRAL texts (CLOUT) abstract no. 260
Reproduced with permission from UNCITRAL
A dispute concerning a sale of the shares of a company incorporated in Cote d'Ivoire arose between a Panamanian company and several persons domiciled in the United Kingdom.
The court noted that the CISG was not applicable because the sale of stocks, shares, investment securities, negotiable instruments or money is excluded from the scope of application of the Convention (article 2(d) CISG).Go to Case Table of Contents
APPLICATION OF CISG: No [Article 2(d)]
APPLICABLE CISG PROVISIONS AND ISSUES
Key CISG provisions at issue:
Classification of issues using UNCITRAL classification code numbers:
2D [Exclusions from Convention: sales of stocks, shares, investment securities,
negotiable instruments or money]
2D [Exclusions from Convention: sales of stocks, shares, investment securities, negotiable instruments or money]
CITATIONS TO OTHER ABSTRACTS OF DECISION
English: Unilex database <http://www.unilex.info/case.cfm?pid=1&do=case&id=364&step=Abstract>
German: Schweizerische Zeitschrift für Internationales und Europäisches Recht (SZIER)/Revue suisse de droit international et de droit européen (1999) 195
CITATIONS TO TEXT OF DECISION
Original language (French): CISG-online.ch website <http://www.cisg-online.ch/cisg/urteile/424.pdf>; Unilex database [Excerpt] <http://www.unilex.info/case.cfm?pid=1&do=case&id=364&step=FullText>
Translation (English): Text presented below
Translation (Portuguese): CISG Brazil database <http://www.cisg-brasil.net/downloads/casos/shares_of_stock%20case.pdf>
CITATIONS TO COMMENTS ON DECISION
English:  Schlechtriem & Schwenzer ed., Commentary on UN Convention on International Sale of Goods, 2d (English) ed., Oxford University Press, Art. 2 para. 27Go to Case Table of Contents
Case text (English translation) [second draft]
Queen Mary Case Translation Programme
9 October 1998 [1077/1998]
Translation by Katarina Kunce Kern [*]
1. The appeal is acceptable since it is lodged in due time and in form foreseen by the law.
2. It should be established from the begining, that the object of this litigation is exclusively a contract of 19 July 1990, its anex, as well as documents relating to discharged debts. The present action does not dispose of obligations relating to endorsed bills payable to order.
During the preliminary proceeding of the present case, in February 1992, the Lugano Convention was not yet in force in Great Britain, so that judicial competence is regulated by the LDIP, already in force in Switzerland.
In matters having to do with domicile, the LDIP alows the parties to elect jurisdiction (article 5. al.1 LDIP). It equally alows the preliminary proceeding of an action validating the seqestration of Swiss jurisdiction.
The Swiss law in this sequestration is in Geneva, in addition, the contract of 19 July 1991 stipulates a juristiction election in favor of the Geneva court. Therefore, this last is competent ratione loci.
Swiss law is applicable by virtue of the parties' choice, as the contract of 19 July 1991 (article 119. al. LDIP) stipulates. The contract concerns the sale of shares of stock, to which neither the Hague Convention of 15 June 1955. nor the Vienna Convention of 11 April 1980 applies (article 118 al.1 LDIP, article 1 al. 2 Hague Convention, article 2(d) Vienna Convention) ...
* Katarina Kunce Kern, a law graduate of the University of Zagreb, is a member of the Bar of Croatia who has worked with French diplomats in Croatia.
All translations should be verified by cross-checking against the original text.Go to Case Table of Contents