• Title/Summary/Keyword: Defects in title

Search Result 8, Processing Time 0.024 seconds

A Study on the Buyer's Remedies for Defects in Title under DCFR (DCFR상 권리부적합에 대한 매수인의 구제권에 관한 연구)

  • Joo-Hee Min
    • Korea Trade Review
    • /
    • v.45 no.2
    • /
    • pp.67-86
    • /
    • 2020
  • This study analyzes the buyer's remedies for defects in title under DCFR, and it is compared with those of CISG. DCFR adopts a unitary concept of 'non-performance' which is any failure and includes delayed performance and any other performance which is not conformed with the contract. In terms of defects in title, any remedies for non-performance are available under DCFR. Thus. under DCFR, the buyer is entitled to enforce specific performance of obligations, to withhold performance, to terminate for fundamental non-performance, to reduce price, to damage for loss, to require repair, or to deliver a replacement. But under CISG, whether or not defects in title constitute 'non-conformity' is not clear and the majority understands 'non-conformity' does not include title defects. Therefore, the buyer may not has rights to require repair and delivery of replacement unlike DCFR.

A Study on the Buyer's Remedies in respect of Defects in Title under CISG (CISG상 권리부적합에 대한 매수인의 구제권에 관한 연구)

  • Min, Joo Hee
    • THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
    • /
    • v.61
    • /
    • 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.

  • PDF

A Study on the Seller's Liability for Defects in Title of Goods under SGA (SGA에서 매도인의 권리적합의무에 관한 연구)

  • Min, Joo Hee
    • THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
    • /
    • v.62
    • /
    • pp.33-53
    • /
    • 2014
  • This study examines the seller's liability for defects in title of goods under SGA. If the contracting parties choose SGA as a governing law, they should pay attention to whether a contractual stipulation for defects in title of goods is a condition or a warranty. It is because SGA divides contractual terms into a condition and a warranty. And its effects regarding a breach of a condition or a warranty are different. Under SGA s 12(1) as a condition, in a contract of sale, the seller has a right to sell the goods at the time of contract, and in the case of an agreement to sell, he will have such a right at the time when the property is to pass. Under SGA s 12(2) as a warranty, there is an implied warranty that (a) the goods are free, and will remain free until the time when the property is to pass, from any charge or encumbrance and (b) the buyer will enjoy quiet possession of the goods as long as the buyer retains an interest in the goods. But the seller will not be liable if the third party unlawfully interferes with the buyer's possession.

  • PDF

A Study on the Exclusion of the Seller's Liability for Defects in Title (국제물품매매계약에서 매도인의 권리적합의무 면제에 관한 연구)

  • MIN, Joo-Hee
    • THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
    • /
    • v.69
    • /
    • pp.23-43
    • /
    • 2016
  • This study describes the exclusion of the seller's liability for defects in title under CISG and UCC. Through comparing two provisions, this article provides contracting parties with guidance regarding choosing governing laws and practical advice. CISG and UCC states not only the seller's liability for defects in title but also the exclusion respectively. Under two provisions, contracting parties who wish to avoid this liability may agree that the liability will not apply. Under UCC ${\S}$2-213(2), the seller's warranty can be disclaimed by specific language in the contract or by the circumstances surrounding the transaction. Although there is no express exclusion provision under CISG Article 41 and 42, Article 6 allows contracting parties to agree that they may exclude the application of the seller's liability. Both Article 42 under CISG and ${\S}$2-213(3) under UCC provide where the buyer furnishes specification to the seller. Under UCC ${\S}$2-213(3), it is the buyer's warranty to hold the seller harmless from any claims which arise from the seller complying with specification furnished by the buyer. But, under CISG Article 42, the seller's duty is excluded if the third party right or claim result from the fact that the seller has complied with specifications provided by the buyer. Therefore Article 42 does not charge the buyer with the duty, but rather limits the circumstances under which he could cause claims under Article 42. Interestingly, CISG has provisions which are absent from UCC. First, under Article 41, the seller escapes the liability if the buyer agree to take the goods subject to the third party right or claim. Second, under Article 42(2)(a), the seller is not liable if the buyer knew or could not have been unaware of the third party right or claim at the time of the conclusion of the contract.

  • PDF

A Study on the Buyer's Remedies in respect of Defects in Title under SGA (SGA에서 권리부적합에 대한 매수인의 구제권에 관한 연구)

  • MIN, Joo-Hee
    • THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
    • /
    • v.66
    • /
    • pp.95-118
    • /
    • 2015
  • This study examines the Buyer's Remedies in respect of Defects in Title under SGA. As SGA divides contractual terms into a condition and a warranty, its effects regarding a breach of a condition or a warranty are different. Where a stipulation in a contract of sale is a condition, its breach may give rise to a right to treat the contract as repudiated and to claim damages. Where there is a breach of a warranty in a contract of sale, the aggrieved party may have a right to claim damages. Regarding a breach of a condition under SGA s 12(1), although the buyer may have his right to terminate the contract, he may lose that right when he accept or is deemed to have accept the goods by intimating his acceptance to the seller, acting inconsistently with the ownership of the seller, or retaining the goods beyond a reasonable time without rejecting them. Furthermore, the buyer may claim the estimated loss directly and naturally resulting from seller's breach. SGA contains the principle of full compensation and so the suffered loss and the loss of profit are compensable. As to specific performance under SGA, the court has been empowered to make an order of specific performance to deliver the goods in conformity with the terms of the contract and so it is not a buyer's right. This order should be made only where the goods to be delivered are specific or ascertained goods and the court must think fit to grant the order. However, among these remedies, the buyer cannot have the right to terminate the contract where there is a breach of warranty by the seller under SGA s 12(2).

  • PDF

A study on maxillofacial prosthesis: systematic considerations (악안면 보철 연구: 체계적 고찰)

  • Hwang, Seong-Sig;Im, Yong-Woon
    • Journal of Technologic Dentistry
    • /
    • v.43 no.4
    • /
    • pp.139-144
    • /
    • 2021
  • Purpose: This study aimed to provide basic data to identify the current status of use of maxillofacial prosthesis across the world and discuss its application and research directions in Korea. Methods: Existing literature (study period, 2010 to 2020) from international studies was collected from PsycINFO, CINAHL, and PubMed, whereas domestic studies were searched using KISS and RISS. Maxillofacial prosthesis was used as the search word. A total of three foreign and two domestic articles were searched, and as a result, a total of 12 documents were selected for analysis. Results: A total of 3,311 studies were searched in this study. Among them, 3,253 articles contained in duplicate inspection and exclusion criteria were removed, and 12 articles were selected by removing literature that did not meet the research criteria through title and green and text reviews. Finally, two researchers selected the final 12 articles through handwritten searches. Eleven of them were case studies, and the remaining one was a descriptive study. Conclusion: This study identified the current status of studies that implemented maxillofacial prosthesis, published from January 2010 to January 2020. Facial prosthetics improve the quality of life of patients by restoring defects that appear on different types of mouth and face and promote both function and aesthetics. Therefore, they can be used to treat various conditions and have a positive impact on the future.

The Liability System and the Legal Nature of the Seller's Liability for Defective Goods under Korean Law and the PELS (유럽매매법원칙과 한국법상 결함상품에 대한 매도인의 책임의 법적성격과 책임제도)

  • Lee, Byung-Mun
    • THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
    • /
    • v.44
    • /
    • pp.31-55
    • /
    • 2009
  • This study attempts to provide a comparative overview of the liability systems Korean law and the PELS adopt, that is, the approaches taken by Korean law and the PELS to deal with various irregularities of contractual performance. In addition, it examines in a comparative way the questions of what is the position of the seller's liability for his delivery of defective goods under the chosen liability system and what is the legal nature of the seller's liability. The study finds that the dual liability system taken by Korean law has caused some complexities as to the matter of which liability is applicable in some borderline cases. The problem in such complexities is originated in that the remedies available and the limitation period applicable are differentiated in accordance with one's different categorization among three types of default under the general liability and defective performance under the seller's guarantee liability. In this light, the study argues that the unified liability system under the PELS is superior because its concept of non-performance embraces in a unitary manner all the aspects of default including defects in quality, quantity and title. In addition, it finds that Korean law has suffered endless debates on the question of what are the true contents of the same remedies of rescission and damages provided under the seller's guarantee liability as under the general liability. The debates have been come along on the basis of the traditional presumption among some of civil law jurisdictions that two liabilities be different in terms of not only their legal nature but also their contents of remedies. The study argues that the problem may be circumvented, first, by another way of thinking that the unified liability in Korean law is inferred from the specification of the identical remedies for both the general liability and the seller's guarantee liability under the KCC, second, by the preposition that the requirement of fault be depended upon what remedy the buyer seeks to claim rather than what liability he does to rely on.

  • PDF

The Medial Sural Artery Perforator Flap versus Other Free Flaps in Head and Neck Reconstruction: A Systematic Review

  • Yasser Al Omran;Ellie Evans;Chloe Jordan;Tiffanie-Marie Borg;Samar AlOmran;Sarvnaz Sepehripour;Mohammed Ali Akhavani
    • Archives of Plastic Surgery
    • /
    • v.50 no.3
    • /
    • pp.264-273
    • /
    • 2023
  • The medial sural artery perforator (MSAP) flap is a versatile fasciocutaneous flap, and yet is less commonly utilized than other free flaps in microvascular reconstructions of the head and neck. The aim is to conduct a high-quality Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA)- and Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews 2 (AMSTAR 2)-compliant systematic review comparing the use of the MSAP flap to other microvascular free flaps in the head and neck. Medline, Embase, and Web of Science databases were searched to identify all original comparative studies comparing patients undergoing head and neck reconstruction with an MSAP flap to the radial forearm free flap (RFFF) or anterolateral thigh (ALT) flap from inception to February 2021. Outcome studied were the recipient-site and donor-site morbidities as well as speech and swallow function. A total of 473 articles were identified from title and abstract review. Four studies met the inclusion criteria. Compared with the RFFF and the ALT flaps, the MSAP flap had more recipient-site complications (6.0 vs 10.4%) but less donor-site complications (20.2 vs 7.8%). The MSAP flap demonstrated better overall donor-site appearance and function than the RFFF and ALT flaps (p = 0.0006) but no statistical difference in speech and swallowing function following reconstruction (p = 0.28). Although higher quality studies reviewing the use of the MSAP flap to other free flaps are needed, the MSAP flap provides a viable and effective reconstructive option and should be strongly considered for reconstruction of head and neck defects.