CISG하에서 물품의 일치성과 제3자 클레임에 관한 법적 기준과 판결례에 관한 고찰
A Study on the Legal Explanation and Cases for Conformity of Goods and Third Party Claims under CISG
0
조회
0
다운로드
1
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
The Section II of Chapter II Part III the CISG contains provisions addressing some of the most important seller's obligations under a contract for sale in particular, the obligation to deliver goods that conform to the requirements of the contract and of the CISG in terms of quantity, quality, description and packaging(Art. 35), as well as the duty to ensure that the goods are free from third party claims to ownership rights(Art. 41) and to intellectual property rights(Art. 42). Other provisions connected to the question of conformity are included in the section, including an article governing the relation between the timing of a defect’s occurrence and the division of responsibility therefor between the seller and the buyer(Art. 36), and a provision addressing the seller’s right to cure a lack of conformity if goods are delivered before the date required for delivery. The section also includes provisions regulating the procedure that a buyer must follow in order to preserve claims that the seller has violated the obligation to deliver conforming goods or to deliver goods free from third party claims. These include a provision governing the buyer’s duty to examine the goods following delivery(Art. 38) and provisions requiring the buyer to give notice of alleged violations of the seller’s obligations(Art. 39 and 43 (1)), as well as provisions excusing or relaxing the consequences of a buyer’s failure to give the required notice(Art. 40, 43 (2), and 44). Art. 38 and 39 have proven to be among the most frequently invoked and most controversial provisions in litigation under the CISG.
Abstract
The Section II of Chapter II Part III the CISG contains provisions addressing some of the most important seller's obligations under a contract for sale in particular, the obligation to deliver goods that conform to the requirements of the contract and of the CISG in terms of quantity, quality, description and packaging(Art. 35), as well as the duty to ensure that the goods are free from third party claims to ownership rights(Art. 41) and to intellectual property rights(Art. 42). Other provisions connected to the question of conformity are included in the section, including an article governing the relation between the timing of a defect’s occurrence and the division of responsibility therefor between the seller and the buyer(Art. 36), and a provision addressing the seller’s right to cure a lack of conformity if goods are delivered before the date required for delivery. The section also includes provisions regulating the procedure that a buyer must follow in order to preserve claims that the seller has violated the obligation to deliver conforming goods or to deliver goods free from third party claims. These include a provision governing the buyer’s duty to examine the goods following delivery(Art. 38) and provisions requiring the buyer to give notice of alleged violations of the seller’s obligations(Art. 39 and 43 (1)), as well as provisions excusing or relaxing the consequences of a buyer’s failure to give the required notice(Art. 40, 43 (2), and 44). Art. 38 and 39 have proven to be among the most frequently invoked and most controversial provisions in litigation under the CISG.
참고문헌 (44)
- 강정혜, "국제물품매매계약에 관한 UN협약(CISG)상의 물품의 계약적합성과 입증 책임", 경제법연구, 10(1), pp.237~255 (2011), 한국경제법학회
- 김재성, "국제물품매매계약에서 포장의 계약적합성에 관한 연구", 무역상무연구, 54, pp.123~144 (2012), 한국무역상무학회[DOI]
- 심종석, "국제통일계약규범하에서 하자담보책임에 관한 비교 연구 - CISG, PICC 및 PECL의 법적 기준과 요건을 중심으로 -", 국제상학, 20(3), pp.71~92 (2005), 한국국제상학회
- 吳元奭, "國際物品賣買契約에서 物品에 대한 賣渡人의 契約適合義務-UN 統 一 賣買法 第35條를 中心으로 -", 무역학회지, 27(3), pp.1~16 (2002), 한국무역학회
- 오원석, "국제물품매매계약에서 물품적합성에 관한 비교연구", 무역상무연구, 51, pp.79~99 (2011), 한국무역상무학회
- 이우영, "국제물품매매계약에서 물품의 계약적합성에 관한 비교연구 - CISG와 UCC를 중심으로 -", 국제상학, 24(3), pp.35~55 (2009), 한국국제상학회
- 新堀 聰, "ウィ―ソ賣買條約と貿易契約" (2009), 同文館出版
- 井原 宏, "判例 ウィ―ソ賣買條約" (2010), 東信堂
- Anderson, C. B., "Article 39 of the CISG and Its ‘Noble Month’ for Notice Giving; A Gracefully Ageing Doctrine?", Journal of Law & Commerce, University of Pittsburgh (2012)
- Bonell M, "Article 7 : Interpretation, Gap-filling, in Bianca-Bonell Commentary" (1987), Milan Giuffre
- Flechtner, H. M., "Drafting Contracts Under the CISG" (2008), Oxford Univ. Press
- Honnold, J. O., "Uniform Law for International Sales under the 1980 United Nations Convention" (1999), Kluwer Law International
- Huber, P., "The CISG" (2007), European Law Publishers
- Illescas, O. R., "The Scope of the Common European Sales Law: B2B, Goods, Digital Content and Services", Journal of International Trade Law and Policy (2012)
- Lookofsky, J., "Understanding the CISG" (2008), Wolters Kluwer
- "Analysis of Buyer's Obligations under Articles 38 and 39 of the United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods" (2012)[URL]
- Schlechtriem, P., "Commentary on the UN Convention on the International Sale of Goods" (1998), Oxford Univ. Press
- Schlechtriem, P., "Uniform Sales Law : The UN Convention on Contracts for the International Sales of Goods" (1986), Vienna Manz
- Schwenzer, I., "Commentary on the UN Convention on the International Sale of Goods" (2010), Oxford Univ. Press
- "The Responsibilities and Rights of Both Buyer and Seller in International Trade Concerning the Conformity of the Goods and Additional Contractual Requirem" (2013)[URL]
- Stefan Kröll, "UN Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods(CISG)" (2011), C. H. Beck
- "Audiencia Provincial de Barcelona (Spain),『Unknown』, 1998.05.26", ~ (1998)
- "Bundesgerichtshof (Germany),『VIII ZR 268", 04』, 2006.01.11, 2006
- "Cour d' Appel de Paris (France),『03", 21335』, 2005.02.25, 2005
- "Cour d' Appel de Paris (France),『2002", 18702』, 2004, 2004
- "Cour de Cassation (France),『526 FP』, 2002.03.19", ~ (2002)
- "Federal Supreme Court (Bundesgerichtshof)(Germany), VIII ZR 159", 94, 1995, 1995
- "Handelsgericht Zürich(Switzerland),『HG 930634』, 1998.11.30", ~ (1998)
- "Hof' S-Hertogenbosch (Netherlands),『Unknown』, 2002.10.15", ~ (2002)
- "Hof van Beroep, Antwerpen (Belgium),『1995", AR, pp.1998, ~
- "Hof van Beroep, Gent (Belgium),『Unknown』, 2003.05.12", ~ (2003)
- "ICC Court of Arbitration, Paris (France),『11333』, 2002", ~ (2002)
- "Landgericht Berlin (Germany),『52 S 247", 94』, 1994, 1994
- "Netherlands Arbitration Institute (Netherlands),『2319』, 2002", ~ (2002)
- "Oberlandesgericht Frankfurt am Main (Germany),『13 U 51", 93』, 1994, 1994
- "Oberlandesgericht Köln (Germany),『16U62", 07』, 2008.05.19, 2008
- "Oberster Gerichtshof (Austria),『7Ob301", 01t』, 2002.01.14, 2002
- "Rechtbank Arnhem (Netherlands),『172920", HA ZA 08-1228』, 2009. 02.11, 2009
- "Rechtbank van Koophandel (Commercial Court) (Belgium),『Unknown』, 2002", ~ (2002)
- "Supreme Court of Western Australia(Australia),『FUL 169 of 2003』, 2004", ~ (2004)
- "Tribunal Supremo (Spain),『133", 2008』, 2008.01.17, 2008
- "Tribunale di Forlì (Italy),『2280", 2007』, 2008.12.11, 2008
- "U.S. District Court of New York (USA),『00 Civ. 5189 (RCC)』, 2006", ~ (2006)
- "U.S. District Court of New York (USA),『09 Civ. 3059 (TPG)』, 2010.03.30", ~ (2010)