Go to Database Directory || Go to Information on other available case data
Search the entire CISG Database (case data + other data)

2,000 cases 7,500 case annotations

Article 15. When Offer becomes Effective; Prior Withdrawal

TEXT OF ARTICLE 15

(1) An offer becomes effective when it reaches the offeree.

(2) An offer, even if it is irrevocable, may be withdrawn if the withdrawal reaches the offeree before or at the same time as the offer.


OUTLINE OF ISSUES

Reproduced with permission of UNCITRAL

15A Effective on reaching offeree (art. 15(1))

15B Withdrawal of offer (art. 15(2))

15B1 Withdrawal reaches offeree before or at same time as offer


DESCRIPTORS

Offers ; Reaches, definition of ; Receipt rule


CASE ANNOTATIONS: UNCITRAL DIGEST CASES PLUS ADDED CASES

UNCITRAL has identified relevant cases in Digests containing case annotations for each article of the CISG. For Art. 15, the UNCITRAL Digest cites six cases: five from Germany, and one from Australia.

Presented below is a composite list of Art. 15 cases reporting these UNCITRAL Digest cases and other Art. 15 cases. All cases are listed in chronological sequence, commencing with the most recent. Asterisks identify the UNCITRAL Digest cases, commencing with the 3 December 1999 citation reported below. Cases are coded to the UNCITRAL Thesaurus.

English texts and full-text English translations of cases are provided as indicated. In most instances researchers can also access UNCITRAL abstracts and link to Unilex abstracts and full-text original-language case texts sourced from Internet websites and other data, including commentaries by scholars to the extent available.

Germany 10 November 2006 Oberlandesgericht [Appellate Court] Dresden (Meat case) 15A [translation available]
 

China 9 November 2005 CIETAC Arbitration Award [CISG/2005/04] (DVD machines case) [translation available]

Canada 28 October 2005 Superior Court of Justice, Ontario (Chateau des Charmes Ltd v. Sabaté USA Inc. et al.)

Netherlands 10 February 2005 Netherland Arbitration Institute (interim award) [English text]

Spain 31 January 2005 Audiencia Provincial [Appellate Court] Cuenca (Live calves case) [translation available]

Belgium 25 January 2005 Rechtbank van Koophandel [District Court] Tongeren (Scaforn International BV & Orion Metal BVBA v. Exma CPI SA) [translation available]
 

Switzerland 11 October 2004 Kantonsgericht [Canton Court] Freiburg 15A [translation available]

Switzerland 29 April 2004 Handelsgericht [Commercial Court] St. Gallen
 

France 10 September 2003 Cour d’appel [Appellate Court] Paris [translation available]
 

* Germany 3 December 1999 Oberlandesgericht [Appellate Court] München [translation available]
 

* Germany 2 September 1998 Oberlandesgericht [Appellate Court] Celle [translation available]
 

Germany 31 July 1997 Landgericht [District Court] Göttingen
 

* Germany 28 February 1996 Landgericht [District Court] Oldenburg (Egg case) [translation available]
 

* Germany 23 May 1995 Oberlandesgericht [Appellate Court] Frankfurt [translation available]

* Australia 28 April 1995 Federal District Court, Adelaide (Roder v. Rosedown)
 

* Germany 24 November 1992 Landgericht [District Court] Krefeld (Shoes case) [translation available]
 

Germany 2 September 1991 Oberlandesgericht [Appellate Court] Celle
 

Germany 26 September 1990 Landgericht [District Court] Hamburg


UNCITRAL CASE DIGEST

The UNCITRAL Digest of case law on the United
Nations Convention on the International Sale of Goods
[*]

A/CN.9/SER.C/DIGEST/CISG/15 [8 June 2004]
Reproduced with the permission of UNCITRAL

ARTICLE 15

      (1) An offer becomes effective when it reaches the offeree. 

      (2) An offer, even if it is irrevocable, may be withdrawn if the withdrawal reaches the offeree before or at the same time as the offer.

DIGEST OF ARTICLE 15 CASE LAW

1. Paragraph (1) of article 15 provides that an offer becomes effective when it reaches the offeree. Article 24 defines when a revocation “reaches” the offeree. Although paragraph (1) has been cited,[1] no reported decision has interpreted it.

2. Paragraph (2) provides that an offeror may withdraw its offer if the withdrawal reaches the offeree before or at the same time as the offer. After the offer reaches the offeree, the offeror may no longer withdraw the offer but may be entitled to revoke the offer in accordance with article 16. There are no reported cases applying paragraph (2).


FOOTNOTES

* The present text was prepared using the full text of the decisions cited in the Case Law on UNCITRAL Texts (CLOUT) abstracts and other citations listed in the footnotes. The abstracts are intended to serve only as summaries of the underlying decisions and may not reflect all the points made in the digest. Readers are advised to consult the full texts of the listed court and arbitral decisions rather than relying solely on the CLOUT abstracts.

[Citations to cisgw3 case presentations have been substituted [in brackets] for the case citations provided in the UNCITRAL Digest. This substitution has been made to facilitate online access to CLOUT abstracts, original texts of court and arbitral decisions, and full text English translations of these texts (available in most but not all cases). For citations UNCITRAL had used, go to <http://www.uncitral.org/english/clout/digest_cisg_e.htm>.]

1. [GERMANY Oberlandesgericht [Appellate Court] München 3 December 1999, available online at <http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/991203g1.html>] (citing arts. 14, 15(1), 18 & 23); CLOUT case No. 308 [AUSTRALIA Roder v. Rosedown [Federal Court] 28 April 1995, available online at <http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/950428a2.html>] (citing arts. 8, 11, 15(1), 18(1) & 29(1) when holding that parties had concluded contract with a retention of title clause). The following decisions cite article 15 but because they do not involve withdrawal of the offer -- see para. 2 -- the citations effectively refer to paragraph (1) of article 15: CLOUT case No. 318 [GERMANY Oberlandesgericht [Appellate Court] Celle 2 September 1998, available online at <http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/980902g1.html>] (citing arts. 14, 15 & 18 when finding that parties had concluded a contract); [GERMANY Landgericht [District Court] Oldenburg 28 February 1996, available online at <http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/960228g1.html>] (citing arts. 14, 15, 16, 17, 18 & 19); CLOUT case No. 291 [GERMANY Oberlandesgericht [Appellate Court] Frankfurt 23 May 1995, available online at <http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/.html>] (citing arts. 14, 15, 18(3), 19(1) & (3)) (see full text of the decision); [GERMANY Landgericht [District Court] Krefeld 24 November 1992, available online at <http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/921124g1.html>] (citing arts. 15 & 18).


Pace Law School Institute of International Commercial Law - Last updated April 10, 2008
Go to Database Directory || Go to Information on other available case data
Comments/Contributions