United States 10 April 2001 Federal Bankruptcy Court (Victoria Alloys v. Fortis Bank)
[Cite as: http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/010410u1.html]
DATE OF DECISION:
JURISDICTION:
TRIBUNAL:
JUDGE(S):
CASE NUMBER/DOCKET NUMBER: 00-18761, Adversary Proceeding No. 01-1045
CASE NAME:
CASE HISTORY: Unavailable
SELLER'S COUNTRY: Switzerland
BUYER'S COUNTRY: United Kingdom (plaintiff)
GOODS INVOLVED: Pig iron from Russia
UNITED STATES: U.S. [Federal] Bankruptcy Court, Northern District of Ohio (Victoria Alloys, Inc. v. Fortis Bank SA/NV) 10 April 2001
Case law on UNCITRAL texts (CLOUT) abstract no. 632
Reproduced with permission of UNCITRAL
The issue before the bankruptcy court was whether the estate of the bankrupt debtor included goods allegedly sold to the debtor.
The bankrupt debtor, a corporation with its place of business in the United States, concluded a contract to purchase pig iron from its parent corporation, a company with its place of business in the United Kingdom. The contract provided that the debtor was to pay against tender of documents of title (articles 54 and 57 CISG). The parent corporation in turn concluded a contract to purchase pig iron from a Russian manufacturer and financed the transaction by granting a security right in the pig iron to its bank. This arrangement was made because of the poor credit rating of the bankrupt debtor. The bankrupt debtor neither signed the written contract with its parent nor did it make payments under that contract before bankruptcy proceedings commenced. The pig iron was shipped from Russia to the United States and stored in warehouses there. The bills of lading and warehouse receipts did not mention the debtor and the debtor never had possession of these documents. The warehousemen acknowledged that they held the pig iron for the parent's bank. The debtor commenced bankruptcy proceedings and brought a claim that the pig iron was part of the bankruptcy estate.
The bankruptcy court found that the debtor had not carried its burden of establishing that the pig iron was part of the bankruptcy estate. Citing both the CISG and domestic law, the court stated that payment of the price was a significant factor in the transfer of title (article 53 CISG) and that the debtor had failed to pay the price in this case.
Go to Case Table of ContentsAPPLICATION OF CISG: Unclear. Sole reference to the CISG is: "Both the Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods (CCISG) and the Uniform Commercial Code require payment per the contract's terms. The following is required under the CCISG:" (citation omitted). This is simply followed by a quotation of the texts of the CISG articles listed below.
APPLICABLE CISG PROVISIONS AND ISSUES
Key CISG provisions at issue:
Classification of issues using UNCITRAL classification code numbers:
Descriptors:
CITATIONS TO OTHER ABSTRACTS OF DECISION
Unavailable
CITATIONS TO TEXT OF DECISION
Original language (English): 261 Bankruptcy Reporter 424; 2001 Bankr. LEXIS 309; 37 Bankruptcy Court Decisions 213; 44 U.C.C. Reporter Service 2d (Callaghan) 722
Translation: Unavailable
CITATIONS TO COMMENTS ON DECISION
English: Keith A. Rowley, "The Convention on the International Sale of Goods", in: Hunter ed., Modern Law of Contracts, Thomson/West (03/2007) § 23:30
Go to Case Table of Contents
Pace Law School
Institute of International Commercial Law - Last updated January 9, 2008