• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제32권3호
• /
• pp.71-91
• /
• 2022

The CISG does not stipulate the subject of the burden of proof, and in the arbitral award, the buyer is liable for proof compared to the seller for nonconformity of the product. Without a unified interpretation of the burden of proof of non-contractual goods, confusion of uncertainty may increase if the parties to the sale contract have a dispute due to the trade in goods. It is an important issue to create a unified regulation on this because the courts or arbitration agencies of the Contracting States of the CISG interpret and apply the "seller's obligation to conform to the goods contract" stipulated in this Convention in various ways. In this study, in the case of international Sales of Goods there is a tendency to prefer arbitration through arbitration agencies in the dispute, so the subject of burden of proof is analyzed through arbitration cases applied by CISG as the governing law. Most international commodity trading around the world is regulated by this Convention, but according to the rigid convention regulations, it is analyzed and interpreted through cases where this convention is applied to each country's international arbitration, suggesting the need for a rigid CISG revision.

• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제34권
• /
• pp.27-52
• /
• 2007

As in more than half of the litigated cases, non-conformity of the goods is alleged by the buyer and, hence, the question aries of whether the buyer has given notice within a reasonable time and is thus allowed to rely on the lack of conformity at all, differences in interpreting the meaning of "reasonable time" in Article 39(1) CISG endanger uniformity of international sales law in a core area. This uniform interpretation of the "reasonable time" in Article 39(1) CISG can, however, not be achieved by merely making recommendations to courts and arbitral tribunals that case law from other CISG jurisdictions should be considered. This can at best lead to confusing results. As you know, the determining of reasonable time is depending on the circumstances concerned with the particular case. So the term 'reasonable time' has proven too imprecise due to its flexibility without defined uniform scale to assist the practitioners in a uniform application of Art. 39(1). Therefore I suggested the factors that influenced the determining of the reasonable time. The factors currently influencing whether an Art. 39(1) notice is given within reasonable time in international practice are: any international trade usage and practices, the nature of the remedy chosen by buyer, the nature of the goods delivered and the mode of dealing with the goods.

• 무역학회지
• /
• 제45권1호
• /
• pp.83-100
• /
• 2020

This study aimed to provide the most accurate analysis possible regarding the buyer's duty to examine goods and give notice, or the like, of non-conformity to the seller under Belgian law in comparison with the CISG and CESL. Even though Belgium is the capital of the Europe Union, most of its laws remain untranslated in English. Therefore, this study may offer key insights into the specificities of Belgian law, which while being derived from the French Napoleon Code has its own practices coded into its Case Law. It also makes a comparison with the new CESL and CISG in order to evaluate their respective influence on national law and other infructuous attempts to harmonize Belgian law for the internal European market. Evaluating the differences of each system in the spirit of comparative law may be a good basis for the development of laws in each jurisdiction.

• 무역학회지
• /
• 제44권2호
• /
• pp.159-172
• /
• 2019

An important issue in trade transactions is risk management. Trading partners focus on how to recognize risks and how to address these areas. This article discusses whether the quality of a substantial period of time remains appropriate to the contract even after the risk has been transferred. If the contracted product is not delivered, then the risk is not transferred because it does not fulfill the obligations of delivery. In order to prevent such risks, the Seller must regard the quality of the goods of their fulfillment and provide them to the Buyer in detail. In addition, it is necessary to carry out several times of transportation or insurances of insurance according to the transaction conditions. Commercial practice comes from repetitive trading activities over many years. I think it is constantly changing as the transaction continues. Changes in the way of international commerce always create new orders and regulations. We need to keep a close eye on them.

• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제54권
• /
• pp.99-122
• /
• 2012

According to the United Nations Convention on the International Sale of Goods, the Seller must deliver the goods, hand over any documents relating to the them and transfer the property the to the goods as required by the contract, and buyer must pay the price for the goods and take delivery of them as required by the contract. In particular, the seller provides the documents is important. If the documents are discrepancies in credit, the beneficiary may not receive the payment. So It is important to study on conditions of documents in international trade. Documents provided by the seller shall be determined by express terms. If there is no agreement on the express terms, it shall be determined by the implied terms or governing law terms. In practice Seller shall provide the documents are as follows, For example, transport documents, commercial invoice, certificate of origin, insurance policy, packing list, inspection certificate etc. As stated above if it can not be determined by express terms, it is determined by the implied terms. In international trade, leading to the implied terms is incoterms(R) 2010 and UCP 600. Incoterms(R) 2010 define the seller must provide the goods and the commercial in conformity with the sales contract and any other evidence of conformity that may be required by the contract and UCP 600 are rules that apply to documentary credit. This paper, the practical utility between Incoterms(R) 2010 and UCP 600 is studied.

• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제37권
• /
• pp.61-85
• /
• 2008

Bills of lading are crucial in international sales on shipment terms since they guard buyers against loss of or damage to the goods in transit by giving them the rights against carriers. A bill of lading, as document of title, gives the buyer the right to demand physical possession of the goods from the carrier and enables the buyer who is in possession of damaged or short-delivered goods to sue the carrier. In this context the buyer in sales on CIF or CFR terms or FOB terms with additional services benefits from the bill of lading which functions as a receipt of goods and a evidence of the terms of the contract of carriage. Protection of such buyer's interests can be provided in the sale contract through appropriate express or implied terms on the seller's documentary obligations: Which transport document, a bill of lading or a sea waybill, is required? Who should be named as the consignee in the transport document and, in case of bill of lading, by whom should the bill be endorsed? What should be stated in the bill of lading for the quantity of the goods? How about a bill of lading that contains so called "unknown clause"? How many bills of lading for the entire contract goods should be tendered? Can a bill of lading stating that the goods have been shipped in apparent good order and condition also state that the goods were damaged after shipment? This paper seeks to provide answers for these particular questions.

• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제54권
• /
• pp.123-144
• /
• 2012

Seller shall deliver the goods with a perfect condition of packing or container in international trade. Unless otherwise seller shall warranty that the goods arrive at destination with a safe and economic value. Buyer may ask packing is to be made in specific condition or refuse to accept when the packing is not made in accordance with trade customs between among merchants. Especially packing is to be considered under the local law and process. Sometimes tax will be added to specific condition of packing for example glasses, metal sheet or others. Warning signs shall be included as form of both words and diagrams, and be in form of ensuring understanding in the local market. Wide range of warning signs can be used for communications and understanding of packing. Packing of a product can usefully symbolize a range of product information, or any relevant warnings, and give an opportunity for displaying messages of promoting the company and the goods. The seller may choose the best method to maintain its value but find a way to reduce packing cost, size for convenience during delivery, design, and local customs. There are many things to be considered for packing to seller. The purpose of packing is to protect the goods itself and to maintain its economic value during storage, delivery, transshipment, and distribution to end users.

• 통상정보연구
• /
• 제15권3호
• /
• pp.65-86
• /
• 2013

본 연구의 목적은 소비자의 자존감과 동조성이 수입명품 복제품 구매의도에 미치는 영향을 파악함으로써 수입명품 복제품 구매방지 대책마련에 도움을 주는데 있었다. 수입명품에 대한 기존 연구들은 주로 소비자의 과시적 또는 신분 상징적 구매행태에 초점을 맞추고 있으나 본 연구는 개인의 심리적 변수, 즉 자존감과 준거집단에 의한 영향 변수에 초점을 맞추어 연구하였다. 본 연구의 결과는 다음과 같다. 수입명품 복제품 구매자들은 자연스럽게 타인의 인식에 상당히 의존적이며 복제품 역시 과시적 구매의도가 강하게 작용하고 있다. 특히 자존감이 높은 구매자일수록 복제품 구매의존도가 낮으며 구매의도 역시 이에 비례해서 낮아진다. 본 논문은 수입복제품 구매자와 비구매자간의 개인 심리적 차이가 구매행동상의 차이점이 있음을 확인하였으며 향후 보다 구체적인 보완 연구방향을 제시하였다는 는데 의의가 있다.

• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제61권
• /
• pp.3-28
• /
• 2014

This study describes the buyer's remedies regarding defects in title under CISG. Although CISG stipulates the seller's liability for the delivery of conforming goods physically at Art. 35 and legally at Art. 41 and Art. 42 respectively, the buyer's remedies are not distinguished between non-conformity governed by Art. 35 and defects in title governed by Art. 41 and Art. 42. If the seller does not fulfill his obligation under Art. 41 and Art. 42 to deliver goods which are free from third party claims, the buyer should pay attention to which remedies are available under CISG. Under CISG, for defects in title in the delivered goods, the buyer is entitled to require performance in Art. 46 (1) unless he has resorted to a remedy which is inconsistent with this requirement, to declare the contract avoided by strictly limiting the situation in which the failure by the seller to perform his obligation amounts to a fundamental breach of contract in Art. 49, to claim damages in Art. 74, and to suspend the performance of his obligation where it becomes apparent that the seller will not perform a substantial part of his obligation in Art. 71 (1). Unlike Art. 35 non-conformity, the buyer may not require delivery of substitute goods under Art. 46 (2), claim repair under Art. 46 (3), and declare price reduction for title defects under Art. 50.

• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제12권
• /
• pp.201-225
• /
• 1999

This article is focused on the review of price reduction and measuring damages under the CISG together with the law relating to sale of goods in main countries when the goods delivered did not conform with the contract. And also reviewed on the election of remedies for the aggrieved party, that is, which one between the two remedies would provide more compensation for the non-conformity. This article can be summarized as below. 1. Price reduction has its principal significance when the buyer accepts non-conforming goods and plays important role only when the seller is not liable for the non-conformity because the same price reduction formula applies for all circumstances. Of course, the buyer must bear any further damages, such as shutdown expenses and other consequential damages. 2. If the seller is liable for the damages and the price level rises, the buyer normally will claim damages since this approach is much more favorable result than price reduction. 3. In case the seller is liable for the damages and the buyer suffers no consequential damages, if the price level falls, price reduction would provide more compensation for the non-conformity than would damages and if there is no change in the market level, the allowance for defects in the goods will be normally the same under the price reduction and damages. By the way, In case the seller is liable for the damages and the buyer suffers consequential damages, it is desired that the buyer firstly elect the price reduction and later seeks to claim for consequential losses when the price level falls and unchanged.