Matchup of CISG Article 76 with ULIS/ULF Go to Database Directory || Go to CISG Table of Contents

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY

CISG ANTECEDENTS

Match-up of CISG article 76 with ULIS/ULF provisions


CISG Article 76

1. If the contract is avoided and there is a current price for the goods, the party claiming damages may, if he has not made a purchase or resale under article 75, recover the difference between the price fixed by the contract and the current price at the time of avoidance as well as any further damages recoverable under article 74. If, however, the party claiming damages has avoided the contract after taking over the goods, the current price at the time of such taking over shall be applied instead of the current price at the time of avoidance.

2. For the purpose of the preceding paragraph, the current price is the price prevailing at the place where delivery of the goods should have been made or, if there is no current price at that place, the price at such other place as serves as a reasonable substitute, making due allowance for differences in the cost of transporting the goods.

  

ULIS Article 84

1. In case of avoidance of the contract, where there is a current price for the goods, damages shall be equal to the difference between the price fixed by the contract and the current price on the date on which the contract is avoided.

2. In calculating the amount of damages under paragraph 1 of this Article, the current price to be taken into account shall be that prevailing in the market in which the transaction took place or, if there is no such current price or if its application is inappropriate, the price in a market which serves as a reasonable substitute, making due allowance for differences in the cost of transporting the goods.

SEE ALSO:

ULIS Article 87. If there is no current price for the goods, damages shall be calculated on the same basis as that provided in Article 82.

ULIS Article 86. The damages referred to in Articles 84 and 85 may be increased by the amount of any reasonable expenses incurred as a result of the breach or up to the amount of any loss, including loss of profit, which should have been foreseen by the party in breach, at the time of the conclusion of the contract, in the light of the facts and matters which were known or ought to have been known to him, as a possible consequence of the breach of the contract.


Comments on the match-up

"This provision corresponds to Article 84 ULIS, but differs from it in some important respects. ULIS treats abstract assessment of damages under the current price rule as having the same standing as concrete assessment of damages under Article 85 ULIS, so that the promisee is free to choose between those methods of assessment where the goods have a current price. . . . Article 76 clearly permit[s] calculation of damages under the current price rule only if the promisee has not yet concluded a substitute transaction. . . .

"Article 84 ULIS [sets abstract damages as] the current price on the day on which the contract was avoided. [CISG Article 76 applies a different formula]. . . . Article 84(2) ULIS provides that the current price to be taken into account is that prevailing the market in which the transaction took place, or, if this is inappropriate, the price in a market which serves as a reasonable substitute. The [CISG] made this rule more precise. . . ." Stoll in Commentary on the UN Convention on the International Sale of Goods, Peter Schlechtriem ed. (Oxford 1998) 579-580 [citations omitted].


Pace Law School Institute of International Commercial Law - Last updated July 30, 1999
Comments/Contributions
Go to Database Directory || Go to CISG Table of Contents