SELECTED CASES BY TYPE OF CONTRACT INVOLVED

KEYWORD Count of Cases
ADMINISTRATIVE CONTRACTS 11
AGENCY CONTRACT 6
ARBITRATION AGREEMENT 6
ASSIGNMENT CONTRACT 1
BANK GUARANTEE 2
BARTER AGREEMENT 2
BUILD-OPERATE-TRANSFER (BOT) CONTRACT 1
BUSINESS PURCHASE AGREEMENT 1
CONCESSION CONTRACT 3
CONSORTIUM AGREEMENT 2
CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE CONTRACT 1
CONSTRUCTION AND MANAGEMENT CONTRACT 1
CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT 23
CONSULTING CONTRACT 2
CONTRACT FOR SUPPLY AND INSTALLATION 1
CONTRACT FOR SUPPLY, INSTALLATION AND MAINTENANCE 1
CONTRACT FOR TRANSFER OF FOOTBALL PLAYER 1
CONTRACT OF CARRIAGE OF GOODS 3
CONTRACT ON TECHNOLOGY EXCHANGE AND TECHNICAL COOPERATION 1
COOPERATION AGREEMENT 2
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 3
DISTRIBUTION AGREEMENT 18
EASEMENT CONTRACT 3
EMPLOYMENT CONTRACT 2
EXPLORATION AND EXPLOITATION AGREEMENT 1
INSURANCE CONTRACT 4
INTER-FIRM AGREEMENT 1
JOINT-VENTURE AGREEMENT 4
LAND USE CONTRACT 1
LEASE CONTRACT 15
LICENSING AGREEMENT 8
LICENSING AND JOINT RESEARCH AGREEMENT 1
LICENSING AND SERVICE AGREEMENT 1
LOAN AGREEMENT 11
LONG-TERM CONTRACTS 142
MARKETING AGREEMENT 1
MEDIATION AGREEMENT 1
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING 5
PRE-BID AGREEMENT 1
PRODUCTION SHARING AGREEMENT 1
SALES CONTRACT 132
SATELLITE CONTRACT 3
SERVICE CONTRACT 36
SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT 9
SHARE OPTION AGREEMENT 1
SHARE PURCHASE AGREEMENT 11
SHAREHOLDERS AGREEMENT 2
STATE CONTRACTS 33
SUPPLY CONTRACT 41
TRANSPORT CONTRACT 4

SELECTED CASES BY NATIONALITY OF THE PARTIES

KEYWORD Count of Cases
AFRICAN 4
ALGERIAN 1
ARGENTINIAN 14
AUSTRALIAN 16
AUSTRIAN 9
BAHAMIAN 1
BELGIAN 5
BELORUSSIAN 7
BERMUDIAN 1
BRAZILIAN 9
BRITISH VIRGIN ISLAND 1
BULGARIAN 1
CANADIAN 10
CENTRAL EUROPEAN 1
CHILEAN 1
CHINESE 33
COLOMBIAN 5
CONGOLESE 1
COSTA RICAN 5
CYPRIOT 6
CZECH 1
DANISH 3
DUTCH 21
DUTCH ANTILLEAN 1
EAST ASIAN 1
EASTERN EUROPEAN 6
ECUADORIAN 1
EGYPTIAN 1
ENGLISH 33
ESTONIAN 2
EUROPEAN 46
Arbitral Award
Ad hoc Arbitration, New York

00-00-0000
SALES CONTRACT - BETWEEN THE UNITED NATIONS ORGANIZATION AND A EUROPEAN COMPANY - IN THE CONTEXT OF A PEACE-KEEPING MISSION IN AFRICA - CONTRACT SILENT AS TO APPLICABLE LAW - PARTIES AGREED ON APPLICATION OF CISG AND UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES
Arbitral Award
ICC International Court of Arbitration, New York 16314

00-00-0000
LONG-TERM CONTRACTS - GAS TURBINE ENGINES SUPPLY CONTRACT - BETWEEN A UNITED STATES COMPANY AND A SHIPYARD INCORPORATED IN A EUROPEAN COUNTRY - GOVERNED BY THE LAW OF COUNTRY X IN EUROPE

VIOLATION OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS - CONTRACT INTERPRETATION UNDER APPLICABLE DOMESTIC LAW - REFERENCE TO ART. 2.1.17 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES AND TO ART. 2:105 PECL TO CONFIRM THE RULE EXPRESSED BY THE APPLICABLE LAW - EXTRINSIC EVIDENCE MAY BE RELIED UPON TO INTERPRET THE CONTRACT AS FAR AS THE COMMON INTENTION OF THE PARTIES CANNOT BE DETERMINED BY THE PLAIN WORDING OF THE CONTRACT
Arbitral Award
Schiedsgericht Berlin

00-00-1990
SALES CONTRACT - BETWEEN AN ECONOMIC UNIT OF THE GERMAN DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC AND AN ECONOMIC UNIT OF AN ANOTHER EASTERN EUROPEAN COUNTRY - CONTRACT GOVERNED BY DOMESTIC LAW (LAW OF THE GERMAN DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC)

HARDSHIP - RADICAL CHANGE IN THE ORIGINAL CONTRACTUAL EQUILIBRIUM - REFERENCE BY ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL TO THE UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES (ARTS. 6.2.1, 6.2.2, 6.2.3) TO DEMONSTRATE THAT SOLUTION REACHED UNDER APPLICABLE DOMESTIC LAW CORRESPONDED TO INTERNATIONALLY ACCEPTED PRINCIPLES
Arbitral Award
ICC International Court of Arbitration - Basle 8128

00-00-1995
SALES CONTRACT - BETWEEN AN AUSTRIAN SELLER AND A SWISS BUYER - GOVERNED BY CISG

FUNDAMENTAL BREACH (ART. 25 CISG) - SELLER'S FAILURE TO GIVE BUYER CORRECT INSTRUCTIONS AS TO PACKAGING

FUNDAMENTAL BREACH (ART. 25 CISG) - LATE DELIVERY - KNOWLEDGE OF SELLER THAT DATE FOR DELIVERY IS ESSENTIAL TO BUYER FIXING OF ADDITIONAL TIME FOR PERFORMANCE NOT NECESSARY

AVOIDANCE - DECLARATION OF AVOIDANCE - INVITATION TO PERFORM UNDER THREAT OF AVOIDANCE - NO SUCCESSIVE DECLARATION NEEDED

DAMAGES - SUBSTITUTE TRANSACTION - REASONABLENESS OF SUBSTITUTE TRANSACTION (ART. 75 CISG) - REQUIREMENTS

INTEREST (ART. 78 CISG) - INTEREST ON OTHER SUMS IN ARREARS - ACCRUAL

INTEREST - RULE OF AVERAGE BANK LENDING RATE TO PRIME BORROWERS CONTAINED IN ART. 7.4.9 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES AND ART. 4.507 OF PRINCIPLES OF EUROPEAN CONTRACT LAW AS A GENERAL PRINCIPLE UNDERLYING CISG (ART. 7(2) CISG) - LIBOR RATE APPLICABLE
Arbitral Award
ICC International Court of Arbitration (Paris) 9474

00-02-1999
STATE CONTRACTS - SERVICE CONTRACT - ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL REQUESTED TO APPLY “GENERAL STANDARDS AND RULES OF INTERNATIONAL CONTRACTS” – REFERENCE TO CISG “WHICH EMBODIES UNIVERSAL PRINCIPLES APPLICABLE IN INTERNATIONAL CONTRACTS” AND TO THE UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES AND TO THE PRINCIPLES OF EUROPEAN CONTRACT LAW AS “RECENT DOCUMENTS THAT EXPRESS THE GENERAL STANDARDS AND RULES OF COMMERCIAL LAW”.

AVOIDANCE OF CONTRACT FOR FRAUDULENT NON-DISCLOSURE OF CIRCUMSTANCES (SEE ARTICLES 3.5 AND 3.8 OF THE UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES; ARTICLE 4.107 OF THE PRINCIPLES OF EUROPEAN CONTRACT LAW).

TERMINATION OF CONTRACT FOR NON-PERFORMANCE – NOTICE TO BE GIVEN WITHIN A REASONABLE TIME (SEE ARTICLE 7.3.2 OF THE UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES).
Arbitral Award
ICC International Court of Arbitration 9759

00-08-1999
ARBITRATION AGREEMENT - BETWEEN A FINANCIAL INSTITUTION BASED IN A EUROPEAN COUNTRY AND A COMPANY BASED IN A SOUTHWEST ASIAN COUNTRY

ARBITRATION AGREEMENT – TO BE INTERPRETED SO AS TO GIVE EFFECT TO IT RATHER THAN TO DEPRIVE IT OF ANY EFFECT (ARTICLE 4.5 OF THE UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES).
Arbitral Award
ICC International Court of Arbitration 10114

00-03-2000
LONG-TERM CONTRACTS - SERVICE CONTRACT - BETWEEN A CHINESE COMPANY AND AN EASTERN EUROPEAN CAR MANUFACTURER

APPLICATION OF THE UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES AS EXPRESSION OF “INTERNATIONAL PRACTICES”
Arbitral Award
ICC International Court of Arbitration, Geneva 9797

28-07-2000
INTER-FIRM AGREEMENT - BETWEEN THE MEMBER FIRMS OF THE ANDERSEN WORLDWIDE ORGANIZATION - ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL REQUESTED BY PARTIES TO DECIDE IN ACCORDANCE WITH TERMS OF THE CONTRACT, "TAKING INTO ACCOUNT GENERAL PRINCIPLES OF EQUITY" - REFERENCE BY ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL TO THE UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES AS "A RELIABLE SOURCE OF INTERNATIONAL COMMERCIAL LAW IN INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION"

CONTRACT INTERPRETATION - ACCORDING TO COMMON INTENTION OF PARTIES OR, IF A COMMON INTENTION CANNOT BE ESTABLISHED, ACCORDING TO UNDERSTANDING OF REASONABLE PERSONS (ART. 4.1(1) AND (2) UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES; ART. 5:101(1) AND (2) OF PRINCIPLES OF EUROPEAN CONTRACT LAW)

CONTRACT PERFORMANCE - PARTIES ENGAGING IN UNCOOPERATIVE ACTS TO THEIR OWN BENEFIT AT THE EXPENSE OF OTHER PARTIES - CONTRARY TO PRINCIPLE OF GOOD FAITH AND FAIR DEALING INHERENT IN INTERNATIONAL CONTRACTS (ART. 1.7 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES)

CONTRACT PERFORMANCE - OBLIGATION INVOLVING DUTY OF BEST EFFORTS - MEANING (ART. 5.4(2) [ART. 5.1.4(2) OF THE 2004 EDITION] UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES)

FUNDAMENTAL NON-PERFORMANCE - CIRCUMSTANCES RELEVANT FOR DETERMINING WHETHER NON-PERFORMANCE IS FUNDAMENTAL (ART. 7.3.1(2) UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES)

TERMINATION OF CONTRACT FOR FUNDAMENTAL NON-PERFORMANCE - RELEASES PARTIES FROM THEIR OBLIGATION TO EFFECT AND TO RECEIVE FURTHER PERFORMANCE (ARTS. 7.3.1 AND 7.3.5 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES)

TERMINATION - RESTITUTION OF WHAT PARTIES HAD SUPPLIED UNDER THE CONTRACT - RESTITUTION IMPOSSIBLE - PARTY NO LONGER ENTITLED TO CLAIM RESTITUTION OF WHAT IT HAD SUPPLIED (ART.7.3.6 [ART. 7.3.7 OF THE 2010 EDITION] UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES)

RIGHT TO DAMAGES - PARTY ENTITLED TO COMPENSATION FOR LOSS SUFFERED ONLY IN CASE OF BREACH BY OTHER PARTY (ART.7.4.2 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES)
Arbitral Award
ICC International Court of Arbitration 10022

00-10-2000
LONG-TERM CONTRACTS - COOPERATION AGREEMENT - ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL REQUESTED TO TAKE INTO ACCOUNT “RELEVANT TRADE USAGES” (ARTICLE 17 ICC RULES OF ARBITRATION) – REFERENCE INCLUDES BUT IS NOT LIMITED TO THE UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES AND THE PRINCIPLES OF EUROPEAN CONTRACT LAW.
Arbitral Award
ICC International Court of Arbitration, Paris 10504

00-11-2000
SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT - BETWEEN TWO EASTERN EUROPEAN COMPANIES - SOLE ARBITRATOR AUTHORIZED TO ACT "EN ARBITRAGE EQUITABLE" - APPLICATION OF UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES

THREAT COMING FROM A THIRD PARTY - RELEVANT IF IT HAS LEFT THE CONTRACTING PARTY "NO REASONABLE ALTERNATIVE"- REFERENCE TO ART. 3.9 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES

THREAT COMING FROM A THIRD PARTY - CONSIDERED AS A LEGITIMATE GROUND FOR THE AVOIDANCE OF CONTRACT WHEN THE THIRD PARTY IS ACCESSORY TO THE OTHER CONTRACTING PARTY - REFERENCE TO ARTS. 3.11 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES
Arbitral Award
Arbitration Institute of the Stockholm Chamber of Commerce

00-00-2001
LONG TERM CONTRACTS - CONTRACT ON TECHNOLOGY EXCHANGE AND TECHNICAL COOPERATION - BETWEEN A EUROPEAN COMPANY AND TWO CHINESE COMPANIES - SILENT AS TO APPLICABLE LAW - INTERPRETED BY ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL AS INTENTION OF PARTIES TO EXCLUDE APPLICATION OF ANY DOMESTIC LAW - APPLICATION OF UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES AS "RULES OF LAW CONSIDERED TO BE MOST APPROPRIATE" IN CASE AT HAND (SEE ARTICLE 24(1) STOCKHOLM ARBITRATION RULES)- SUBSIDIARY APPLICATION OF SWEDISH LAW AS NEUTRAL LAW

UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES DEFINED AS RULES "WHICH HAVE WIDE RECOGNITION AND SET OUT PRINCIPLES THAT OFFERS A PROTECTION FOR CONTRACTING PARTIES THAT ADEQUATELY REFLECTS THE BASIC PRINCIPLES OF COMMERCIAL RELATIONS IN MOST IF NOT ALL DEVELOPED COUNTRIES"
Arbitral Award
ICC International Court of Arbitration 10422

00-00-2001
LONG-TERM CONTRACTS - DISTRIBUTION AGREEMENT - BETWEEN A EUROPEAN COMPANY AND A LATIN AMERICAN COMPANY - CHOICE OF LAW CLAUSE INEFFECTIVE BUT INDICATING PARTIES' DESIRE FOR A NEUTRAL SOLUTION - APPLICATION BY ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL OF THE LEX MERCATORIA (ARTICLE 17.1 ICC RULES OF ARBITRATION) - REFERENCE TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES - LIMITS

CONTRACT FORMATION - ACCEPTANCE CONTAINING MODIFIED TERMS - AMOUNTS TO ACCEPTANCE IF MODIFICATIONS ARE NOT MATERIAL (ARTICLE 2.11 [ART. 2.1.11 OF THE 2004 EDITION] UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES)

CONTRACT FORMATION - CONCLUSION OF CONTRACT DEPENDENT ON AGREEMENT ON SPECIFIC MATTERS (ARTICLE 2.13 [ART. 2.1.13 OF THE 2004 EDITION] UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES)

CONTRACT INTERPRETATION - TERMS TO BE GIVEN EFFECT (ARTICLE 4.5 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES)

TERMINATION OF CONTRACT - FUNDAMENTAL BREACH REQUIRED (ARTICLE 7.3.1(1) UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES) - NOTICE OF TERMINATION WITHOUT FUNDAMENTAL BREACH - TERMINATION NEVERTHELESS EFFECTIVE (ARTICLE 7.3.2 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES) - NOTIFYING PARTY LIABLE FOR DAMAGES

DAMAGES - LOSS OF PROFIT - CALCULATION (ARTICLE 7.4.2 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES)

DAMAGES - DISCRETIONARY ASSESSMENT BY COURT (ARTICLE 7.4.3(2)
Arbitral Award
ICC International Court of Arbitration 11375

00-03-2002
CONSORTIUM AGREEMENT - BETWEEN WESTERN EUROPEAN COMPANIES AND EAST ASIAN COMPANIES - TO BID FOR A BOT CONCESSION IN AN EAST ASIAN COUNTRY - IMPLICIT OBLIGATION FOR CONSORTIUM MEMBERS TO ACT IN GOOD FAITH AMONG THEMSELVES - REFERENCE TO APPLICABLE DOMESTIC LAW AND TO THE UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES
Arbitral Award
ICC International Court of Arbitration 11926

00-00-2003
INTERNATIONAL CONTRACT SILENT AS TO APPLICABLE LAW – SOLE ARBITRATOR DECIDES TO APPLY TRANSNATIONAL PRINCIPLES AND RULES SUCH AS THE UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES, THE PRINCIPLES OF EUROPEAN CONTRACT LAW OR THE CENTRAL LIST OF PRINCIPLES AND RULES OF THE LEX MERCATORIA – SUCH PRINCIPLES TO BE COMPARED WITH CORRESPONDING PROVISIONS OF ITALIAN LAW AS THE OTHERWISE APPLICABLE LAW IN ORDER TO AVOID TAKING EITHER OF THE PARTIES BY SURPRISE
Arbitral Award
ICC International Court of Arbitration 12123

00-00-2003
ARBITRATION AGREEMENT INDICATING “EUROPEAN LAW” AS THE LAW APPLICABLE TO THE MERITS OF THE DISPUTE – ACCORDING TO ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL “EUROPEAN LAW” MAY BE UNDERSTOOD AS “A SORT OF AMALGAM OF FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES TO WHICH THE MAJOR EUROPEAN SYSTEMS ASPIRE, E.G. THOSE WHICH ARE AT THE BASIS OF PROJECTS FOR A EUROPEAN CIVIL CODE, THOSE OF UNIDROIT, THOSE TO BE FOUND IN INTERNATIONAL CONVENTIONS OF UNIFORM LAW, THOSE OF THE LEX MERCATORIA, AND SO FORTH”
Arbitral Award
ICC International Court of Arbitration 12111

06-01-2003
SALES CONTRACT - BETWEEN A RUMANIAN COMPANY AND AN ENGLISH COMPANY - REFERRING TO "INTERNATIONAL LAW" AS THE LAW GOVERNING THE CONTRACT - TO BE UNDERSTOOD AS REFERENCE TO THE GENERAL PRINCIPLES OF LAW AND THE LEX MERCATORIA - APPLICATION OF THE UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES (PARAGRAPH 3 OF THE PREAMBLE OF THE UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES)

PRINCIPLES OF EUROPEAN CONTRACT LAW - ACADEMIC EXERCISE PRELIMINARY TO A EUROPEAN CIVIL CODE - AS SUCH NOT YET APPLICABLE TO INTERNATIONAL COMMERCIAL CONTRACTS
Arbitral Award
Ad hoc Arbitration (Place unknown)

04-03-2004
LONG-TERM CONTRACTS - DISTRIBUTION AGREEMENT - BETWEEN A WESTERN EUROPEAN MANUFACTURER AND A CENTRAL EUROPEAN DISTRIBUTOR - FRENCH LAW GOVERNING THE CONTRACT – REFERENCE TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES IN SUPPORT OF SOLUTIONS ADOPTED UNDER FRENCH LAW

GOOD FAITH PRINCIPLE ACCORDING TO ARTICLES 1134(3) AND 1135 OF FRENCH CIVIL CODE RELEVANT ALSO IN INTERNATIONAL TRADE – ARTICLE 1.7(1) OF UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES

GOOD FAITH AND CONTRACT NEGOTIATION - PARTIES ENTERING INTO NEGOTIATIONS WITH A VIEW TO SETTLE DISPUTE BOUND TO ACT IN GOOD FAITH IN SEARCH OF AMICABLE SOLUTION – DUTY TO NEGOTIATE IN GOOD FAITH NOT BREACHED BY MERELY REFUSING TERMS OF SETTLEMENT PROPOSED BY OTHER PARTY

GOOD FAITH AND CONTRACT PERFORMANCE – DISTRIBUTORSHIP AGREEMENT PROVIDING FOR YEARLY MINIMUM QUANTITIES OF GOODS TO BE PURCHASED BY DISTRIBUTOR – DISTRIBUTOR'S FAILURE TO MEET YEARLY QUOTA – MANUFACTURER’S CLAIM FOR BREACH OF CONTRACT CONTRARY TO GOOD FAITH WHERE DISTRIBUTOR PURCHASED A SUBSTANTIAL QUANTITY OF GOODS IN EXCESS OF YEARLY QUOTA AT THE END OF PREVIOUS YEAR AND ITS FAILURE TO PURCHASE GOODS THE FOLLOWING YEAR WAS DUE TO DISPUTE WITH MANUFACTURER

CONTRACT PROHIBITING DISTRIBUTOR FROM SELLING SIMILAR PRODUCTS FROM OTHER SUPPLIERS – DISTRIBUTOR NEVERTHELESS SELLING COMPETING GOODS – MANUFACTURER AWARE OF IT BUT NOT OBJECTING PREVENTED FROM INVOKING YEARS LATER DISTRIBUTOR'S BREACH OF CONTRACT – PROHIBITION OF INCONSISTENT BEHAVIOUR A GENERALLY ACCEPTED PRINCIPLE IN INTERNATIONAL TRADE - ARTICLE 1.8 OF UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES 2004
Arbitral Award
Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS)

06-07-2004
DISPUTE BETWEEN THE FOOTBALL ASSOCIATION OF WALES AND THE UNION OF EUROPEAN FOOTBALL ASSOCIATIONS (UEFA) - CONTRA PROFERENTEM RULE - GENERAL PRINCIPLE OF LEX SPORTIVA - REFERENCE TO ARTICLE 4.6 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES
Arbitral Award
Netherlands Arbitration Institute

10-02-2005
SALES CONTRACT - BETWEEN DUTCH SELLER AND ITALIAN BUYER - GOVERNED BY CISG – REFERENCE TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES DEFINED AS "PRINCIPLES IN THE SENSE OF ARTICLE 7(2) CISG" AND TO PRINCIPLES OF EUROPEAN CONTRACT LAW

APPLICABILITY OF SELLER’S STANDARD TERMS – QUESTION AS TO WHETHER BEFORE OR AT TIME OF CONCLUSION OF CONTRACT BUYER MUST BE GIVEN OPPORTUNITY TO KNOW CONTENT OF SELLER'S STANDARD TERMS NOT EXPRESSLY REGULATED IN CISG - QUESTION LEFT OPEN IN UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES (CF. ARTICLE 2.19 [ART. 2.1.19 OF THE 2004 EDITION] AND COMMENTS AND TO ARTICLE 2.20 [ART. 2.1.20 OF THE 2004 EDITION] – AFFIRMATIVE SOLUTION ADOPTED BY PRINCIPLES OF EUROPEAN CONTRACT LAW (ARTICLE 2:104)
Arbitral Award
Internationales Schiedsgericht der Wirtschaftskammer Österreich

11-05-2006
SALES CONTRACT - BETWEEN AN AUSTRIAN COMPANY AND A EASTERN EUROPEAN COMPANY - PARTIES AGREED ON APPLICATION OF AUSTRIAN LAW INCLUDING CISG AS THE LAW APPLICABLE TO THE SUBSTANCE OF THE DISPUTE

ASSIGNMENT OF CLAIM TO PAYMENT OF PRICE TO FINANCIAL INSTITUTION – OBLIGOR ENTITLED TO RIGHT OF SET-OFF VIS-À-VIS ASSIGNOR UNTIL INFORMED OF ASSIGNMENT (SEE § 1396 OF THE AUSTRIAN CIVIL CODE AS WELL AS ARTICLES 9.1.10(1) AND 9.1.13(2) OF THE UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES 2004 AND ARTICLES 11:303(4) AND 10:107(1) OF THE PRINCIPLES OF EUROPEAN CONTRACT LAW)

THIRD PARTY’S ACCEPTANCE TO BE SUBSTITUTED AS NEW OBLIGOR VIS-À-VIS OBLIGEE – OLD OBLIGOR REMAINS JOINTLY AND SEVERALLY LIABLE UNLESS EXPRESSLY DISCHARGED BY OBLIGEE (SEE § 1406 OF THE AUSTRIAN CIVIL CODE AS WELL AS ARTS. 9.2.1 AND 9.2.5(3) OF THE UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES 2004)

RIGHT TO INTEREST (ART. 78 CISG) – APPLICATION OF STATUTORY RATE CREDITOR'S DOMESTIC LAW – RATE OF 9,47% P.A. AS PROVIDED BY § 1333(2) OF THE AUSTRIAN CIVIL CODE AS AMENDED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE EC DIRECTIVE 2000/35 ON COMBATING LATE PAYMENT IN COMMERCIAL TRANSACTIONS
Arbitral Award
ICC International Court of Arbitration

09-10-2006
SALES CONTRACT - BETWEEN TWO EUROPEAN COMPANIES - SWISS LAW APPLICABLE - REFERENCE TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES TO CONFIRM SOLUTION ADOPTED UNDER SWISS LAW

SELLER'S FAILURE TO PERFORM DUE TO BUYER'S BEHAVIOUR - BUYER MAY NOT RELY ON SELLER'S NON-PERFORMANCE (ARTICLE 7.1.2 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES)

SELLER'S IMPOSSIBILITY TO PERFORM DUE TO BUYER'S BEHAVIOUR - CONTRACT NOT NULLIFIED (COMMENT 3(A) TO ARTICLE 7.2.2 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES
Arbitral Award
Internationales Schiedsgericht der Wirtschaftskammer Österreich

19-03-2007
DISPUTE BETWEEN TWO EUROPEAN COMPANIES

ARBITRATION - POWERS OF ARBITRATORS DERIVING FROM CONTRACT BETWEEN PARTIES AND ARBITRATORS - REFERENCE TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES IN SUPPORT OF THE SOLUTION ADOPTED UNDER APPLICABLE DOMESTIC LAW (LAW OF A EASTERN EUROPEAN COUNTRY)

PERFORMANCE OF CONTRACT - PARTIES' DUTY TO ACT IN GOOD FAITH (ARTICLE 1.7(1) UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES)
Arbitral Award
Foreign Trade Court of Arbitration attached to the Serbian Chamber of Commerce

23-01-2008
SALES CONTRACT - BETWEEN A SERBIAN SELLER AND AN ITALIAN BUYER – PARTIES' CHOICE OF SERBIAN LAW AS THE LAW APPLICABLE TO THE SUBSTANCE OF THE DISPUTE - CISG APPLICABLE ACCORDING TO ITS ART. 1(1)(A) – ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL DECIDES ALSO TO APPLY BOTH THE PRINCIPLES OF EUROPEAN CONTRACT LAW AND THE UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES AS EXPRESSION OF THE TRADE USAGES IT HAD TO TAKE INTO ACCOUNT ACCORDING TO THE RELEVANT ARBITRATION RULES

SELLER’S FAILURE TO DELIVER TOGETHER WITH THE GOODS THE CERTIFICATE OF THEIR ORIGIN AS REQUESTED UNDER THE CONTRACT – AMOUNTS TO A NON-PERFORMANCE (ARTICLES 35(1), 36(1) AND 45(1)(B) CISG))

BUYER’S RIGHT TO DAMAGES FOR THE LOSSES CAUSED BY SELLER’S NON-PERFORMANCE – REFERENCE TO ARTICLE 74 CISG AND TO ARTICLES 9:501 AND 9:502 OF THE PRINCIPLES OF EUROPEAN CONTRACT LAW AND TO ARTICLES 7.4.1 AND 7.4.4 OF THE UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES.

RIGHT TO INTEREST – APPLICABLE RATE – REFERENCE TO METHOD OF CALCULATION INDICATED IN ARTICLES 9:508 OF THE PRINCIPLES OF EUROPEAN CONTRACT LAW AND 7.4.9 OF THE UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES
Arbitral Award
Permanent Court of Arbitration

00-00-2009
LONG-TERM CONTRACTS - LICENSING AGREEMENT - BETWEEN EUROPEAN COMPANY AND INTERNATIONAL GOVERNMENTAL ORGANISATION – PARTIES’ EXPRESS CHOICE OF UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES AS THE LAW GOVERNING THE CONTRACT

FORMATION OF CONTRACTS – REFERENCE TO ARTICLES 2.1.1., 2.1.2., 2.1.3., AND 2.1.6 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES
Arbitral Award
Ad hoc Arbitration, The Hague

30-03-2010
STATE CONTRACTS - LONG-TERM CONTRACTS - EXPLORATION AND EXPLOITATION AGREEMENT - BETWEEN TWO UNITED STATES COMPANIES AND THE ECUADORIAN GOVERNMENT – REFERENCE TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES TO INTERPRET APPLICABLE LAW (INTERNATIONAL LAW AS WELL AS ECUADORIAN LAW)

LOSS OF A CHANCE – CRITERION FOR DETERMINING AMOUNT OF DAMAGES IN CASE OF BREACH OF THE BIT DUE TO DENIAL OF JUSTICE – REFERENCE BY ONE OF THE PARTIES TO ARTICLE 7.4.3(2) OF UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES – ACCORDING TO ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL ONLY ADMISSIBLE WHERE AMOUNT OF LOSS NOT DETERMINABLE – REFERENCE TO COMMENT 2 TO ARTICLE 7.4.3 OF UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES

FORCE MAJEURE – HARDSHIP – DISTRIBUTION BETWEEN THE PARTIES IN A JUST AND EQUITABLE MANNER OF THE LOSSES AND GAINS RESULTING FROM UNFORESEEABLE EVENT – REFERENCE TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES (COMMENT ARTICLES 7.1.7 AND TO ARTICLES 6.2.2 – 6.2.3(2)) AND TO PRINCIPLES OF EUROPEAN CONTRACT LAW (ARTICLE 6:111(3)(B)) AS A MEANS TO INTERPRET ECUADORIAN LAW (ARTICLE 1563 ECUADORIAN CIVIL CODE)
Arbitral Award
ICC International Court of Arbitration, Paris 15949

00-05-2012
LONG-TERM CONTRACTS - SERVICE CONTRACT - BETWEEN A NORTH AFRICAN COMPANY AND EASTERN EUROPEAN COMPANY - UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES AS MEANS TO INTERPRET AND SUPPLEMENT APPLICABLE DOMESTIC LAW (FRENCH LAW)

HOTEL MANAGEMENT CONTRACT - TERRORIST ATTACKS IN NEW YORK, DJERBA AND MARRAKECH AMOUNT TO FORCE MAJEURE EVENTS - RESPONDENT ALLOWED TO SUSPEND PAYMENT OF MINIMAL GUARANTEE PROVIDED IN THE CONTRACT - REFERENCE TO ART. 7.1.7 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES


EFFECTS OF FORCE MAJEURE - WHEN THE IMPEDIMENT IS ONLY TEMPORARY, THE EXCUSE FOR NON_PERFORMANCE HAS EFFECT ONLY FOR A REASONABLE PERIOD OF TIME HAVING REGARD TO CONSEQUENCES OF THE IMPEDIMENT ON CONTRACT PERFORMANCE - REFERENCE TO ART. 7.1.7 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES AND ITS COMMENT
Australia
Federal Court of Australia

12-02-2003
LONG-TERM CONTRACTS - ADMINISTRATIVE CONTRACTS - SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT - BETWEEN THE COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA AND TWO AUSTRALIAN SOFTWARE COMPANIES - GOVERNED BY AUSTRALIAN LAW - REFERENCE TO THE UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES AS A MEANS TO INTERPRET AND SUPPLEMENT APPLICABLE DOMESTIC LAW

NO ORAL MODIFICATION CLAUSE - EFFECTIVENESS - EXCEPTION IN CASE OF ESTOPPEL (REFERENCE BY COURT TO ART. 2.18 [ART. 2.1.18 OF THE 2004 EDITION] OF THE UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES)

CONTRACT FOR DEVELOPMENT OF SOFTWARE - CONTRACT PROVIDES FOR PAYMENTS TO BE MADE IN AGREED INSTALMENTS THROUGHOUT THE DURATION OF THE WORK - INSTALMENTS NOT CONDITIONAL ON COMPLETION OF WORK (REFERENCE BY COURT TO ART. 6.1.4, COMMENT 2, OF UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES)

DUTY OF GOOD FAITH AND FAIR DEALING - IMPLIED TERM OF ALL CONTRACTS -ENTIRE AGREEMENT CLAUSE NOT SUFFICIENT TO PRECLUDE SUCH IMPLICATION (REFERENCE BY COURT TO ART. 1.7 OF THE UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES; ART. 1.201 OF THE PRINCIPLES OF EUROPEAN CONTRACT LAW)
China
Henan Luoyang Jianxi District People’s Court

00-00-2002
LONG-TERM CONTRACTS - LEASE CONTRACT - BETWEEN TWO CHINESE COMPANIES - GOVERNED BY CHINESE LAW

"COMMENTS" BY CHINESE JUDGES ON THEIR DECISIONS - NOT LEGALLY BINDING - DECISION AWARDING DAMAGES FOR FUNDAMENTAL BREACH - REFERENCE TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES, CISG AND PRINCIPLES OF EUROPEAN CONTRACT LAW IN A "COMMENT" WRITTEN BY MEMBERS OF THE COURT
International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID)
International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID)

30-07-2010
STATE CONTRACTS - LONG-TERM CONTRACTS - CONCESSION CONTRACT - BETWEEN FRENCH AND SPANISH INVESTORS AND THE ARGENTINIAN GOVERNMENT - DUE TO ARGENTINA'S FINANCIAL CRISIS ARGENTINIAN AUTHORITIES ADOPTED A SERIES OF MEASURES NEGATIVELY AFFECTING PROFITABILITY OF FOREIGN INVESTORS' INVESTMENT - ALLEGED VIOLATION BY ARGENTINA OF BILATERAL INVESTMENT TREATIES - REFERENCE TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES TO INTERPRET APPLICABLE LAW (INTERNATIONAL LAW)

RESPONDENT INVOKING FORCE MAJEURE AS EXCUSE FOR VIOLATION OF BIT - OBJECTION REJECTED ON THE GROUND THAT RESPONDENT WAS PARTLY RESPONSIBLE FOR ITS FINANCIAL CRISIS

REQUEST FOR RE-NEGOTIATION OF TERMS OF CONCESSION - IN ACCORDANCE WITH INTERNATIONAL STANDARDS IMPOSING IN LONG-TERM CONTRACTS IN THE EVENT OF HARDSHIP AN OBLIGATION TO NEGOTIATE CONTRACT ADAPTATION - REFERENCE TO ARTICLE 6:111 PRINCIPLES OF EUROPEAN CONTRACT LAW AND ARTICLES 6.2.2 AND 6.2.3 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES

Italy
Tribunale Padova - Sez. Este

10-01-2006
SALES CONTRACT - BETWEEN AN ITALIAN MANUFACTURER AND AN ENGLISH DISTRIBUTOR

JURISDICTION - EUROPEAN COUNCIL REGULATION NO. 44/2001 ON JURISDICTION AND RECOGNITION AND ENFORCEMENT OF JUDGEMENTS IN CIVIL AND COMMERCIAL MATTERS - JURISDICTION OF COURT FOR PLACE OF PERFORMANCE

NEED FOR AN AUTONOMOUS INTERPRETATION OF REGULATION - RECOURSE TO CISG IN VIEW OF ITS LARGE CONSENSUS WORLDWIDE AND ITS IMPORTANCE AS MODEL FOR OTHER INSTRUMENTS ADOPTED AT EUROPEAN LEVEL

NOTION OF "CONTRACT OF SALE" UNDER THE REGULATION (ART. 1(1)(B)) - DEFINED ACCORDING TO CISG

NOTION OF "PLACE OF DELIVERY" UNDER THE REGULATION (ART. 5 (1)(B)) - RECOURSE TO ART. 31(A) CISG - SOLUTION CONFIRMED BY OTHER "AUTONOMOUS" INTERNATIONAL INSTRUMENTS SUCH AS UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES OF INTERNATIONAL COMMERCIAL CONTRACTS (SEE ART. 6.1.6(1)(B)) AND PRINCIPLES OF EUROPEAN CONTRACT LAW (SEE ART. 7:101(1)(B))
Italy
Corte di Cassazione Sez. Unite

05-10-2009
SALES CONTRACT - BETWEN AN ITALIAN SELLER AND A GERMAN BUYER - REFERENCE TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES AS A MEANS OF INTERPRETING INTERNATIONAL UNIFORM LAW INSTRUMENTS (EUROPEAN COUNCIL REGULATION NO. 44/2001 ON JURISDICTION AND RECOGNITION AND ENFORCEMENT OF JUDGEMENTS IN CIVIL AND COMMERCIAL MATTERS)

ARTICLE 5 (1)(B) OF THE REGULATION ESTABLISHING JURISDICTION OF COURTS FOR "PLACE OF DELIVERY OF THE GOODS" - TO BE UNDERSTOOD AS PLACE OF ULTIMATE DESTINATION AND NOT AS PLACE WHERE GOODS ARE HANDED OVER TO THE FIRST CARRIER AS PROVIDED IN CISG AND THE UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES
Lithuania
Supreme Court of Lithuania

06-11-2006
SALES CONTRACT - BETWEEN TWO LITHUANIAN PARTIES - GOVERNED BY LITHUANIAN LAW - REFERENCE TO THE UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES AND THE PRINCIPLES OF EUROPEAN CONTRACT LAW TO INTERPRET APPLICABLE DOMESTIC LAW (LITHUANIAN LAW)

PRELIMINARY CONTRACT - REFUSAL BY ONE OF THE PARTIES TO EXECUTE THE FINAL CONTRACT - PARTY LIABLE FOR DAMAGES COVERING NEGOTIATION EXPENSES AND THE LOST OPPORTUNITY (ARTICLE 6.165 PARA.4 OF THE LITHUANIAN CIVIL CODE; REFERENCE TO COMMENT 2 TO ARTICLE 2.13 (NOW ARTICLE 2.1.13) ("CONCLUSION OF CONTRACT DEPENDENT ON AGREEMENT ON SPECIFIC MATTERS OR IN A SPECIFIC FORM") AND TO COMMENTS TO ARTICLE 2.15 (NOW ARTICLE 2.1.15) ("NEGOTIATIONS IN BAD FAITH") OF THE UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES, AS WELL AS TO ARTICLE 3.301(2) AND (3) OF THE EUROPEAN PRINCIPLES).
Netherlands
Gerechtshof's Hertogenbosch

16-10-2002
SALES CONTRACT - BETWEEN A FRENCH SELLER AND A DUTCH BUYER - GOVERNED BY CISG

INTERPRETATION OF CISG – REGARD TO INTERNATIONAL ORIGIN OF THE CONVENTION AND NEED OF ITS UNIFORM APPLICATION (ARTICLE 7 CISG) – REGARD TO COMMON PRINCIPLES OF CONTRACTING STATES – REFERENCE TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES AND TO PRINCIPLES OF EUROPEAN CONTRACT LAW

APPLICABILITY OF SELLER’S STANDARD TERMS – TRADE USAGE (ARTICLE 9(2) CISG))

INCORPORATION OF SELLER’S STANDARD TERMS INTO CONTRACT - APPLICATION OF GENERAL RULES ON OFFER AND ACCEPTANCE (ARTICLE 18 CISG) - REFERENCE TO STANDARD TERMS IN OFFER NECESSARY

QUESTION AS TO WHETHER BEFORE OR AT TIME OF CONCLUSION OF CONTRACT BUYER MUST BE GIVEN OPPORTUNITY TO KNOW CONTENT OF SELLER'S STANDARD TERMS NOT EXPRESSLY REGULATED IN CISG - QUESTION LEFT OPEN IN UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES (CF. COMMENTS TO ARTICLE 2.20[ART. 2.1.20 OF THE 2004 EDITION]) – AFFIRMATIVE SOLUTION ADOPTED BY PRINCIPLES OF EUROPEAN CONTRACT LAW (ARTICLE 2.104) – SAME SOLUTION TO BE ADOPTED UNDER CISG AS IT PROMOTES GOOD FAITH IN INTERNATIONAL TRADE AND REFLECTS DOMESTIC LAW OF BOTH SELLER’S AND BUYER’S COUNTRIES (FRANCE AND THE NETHERLANDS)
Netherlands
Hoge Raad

21-09-2007
SALES CONTRACT - BETWEEN TWO DUTCH PARTIES - REFERENCE TO PRINCIPLES OF EUROPEAN CONTRACT LAW AND TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES TO INTERPRET APPLICABLE DOMESTIC LAW (DUTCH LAW)

STANDARD TERMS - EXEMPTION CLAUSE - WHETHER OR NOT BINDING ON ADHERING PARTY (ARTICLE 6:233(B) DUTCH CIVIL CODE; ARTICLE 2:204(2) OF THE PRINCIPLES OF EUROPEAN CONTRACT LAW AND ARTICLE 2.1.20(1) OF THE UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES)
Netherlands
Hoge Raad

11-07-2008
SALES CONTRACT - BETWEEN TWO DUTCH COMPANIES - REFERENCE TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES IN SUPPORT OF SOLUTION ADOPTED UNDER THE APPLICABLE DOMESTIC LAW (DUTCH LAW)

ADMISSIBILITY OF EXEMPTION CLAUSES - REFERENCE TO ARTICLE 7.1.6 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES AND COMMENTS THERETO AS WELL AS TO ARTICLE 8:109 PRINCIPLES OF EUROPEAN CONTRACT LAW
Netherlands
Hoge Raad

08-07-2011
SALES CONTRACT - BETWEEN TWO DUTCH COMPANIES - REFERENCE TO THE UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES AS A MEANS OF INTERPRETING THE APPLICABLE DOMESTIC LAW (DUTCH LAW)

TERMINATION OF CONTRACT BY MERE NOTICE - TERMINATION NOT PRECLUSIVE OF RIGHT TO DAMAGES - REFERENCE TO ARTICLES 45, 61 AND 49, 64 CISG, ARTICLES 8:102 AND 9:303 OF THE PRINCIPLES OF EUROPEAN CONTRACT LAW (PECL), ARTICLES III-3:102 AND III-3:507 OF THE DRAFT COMMON FRAME OF REFERENCE (DCFR) AND TO ARTICLES 7.4.1 AND 7.3.2 OF THE UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES
Russian Federation
Arbitrazh Court of Saint Petersburg and Leningrad area

29-04-2011
SALES CONTRACT - BETWEEN TWO RUSSIAN COMPANIES - REFERENCE TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES AND OTHER INTERNATIONAL AND FOREIGN LEGAL SOURCES TO SUPPLEMENT APPLICABLE DOMESTIC LAW (RUSSIAN LAW)

IMPUTATION OF PAYMENTS - REFERENCE, AMONG OTHERS, TO ARTICLES 6.12 (1) OF UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES AND 7:109 (4)OF PRINCIPLES OF EUROPEAN CONTRACT LAW
Spain
Tribunal Supremo (Sala de lo Civil)

04-07-2006
LONG-TERM CONTRACTS - AGENCY CONTRACT - BETWEEN A GERMAN SHIPPING COMPANY AND A SPANISH COMPANY

UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES AND PRINCIPLES OF EUROPEAN CONTRACT LAW AS MEANS OF INTERPRETING DOMESTIC LAW (GERMAN LAW)

GOOD FAITH - PARAGRAPH 242 OF THE GERMAN CIVIL CODE DIFFERENT FROM ART. 1258 OF THE SPANISH CIVIL CODE - CORRESPONDING IN SUBSTANCE TO ART. 1.7 OF THE UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES AND ART. 1:201 OF THE PRINCIPLES OF EUROPEAN CONTRACT LAW
Spain
Tribunal Supremo (Sala de lo Civil)

23-07-2007
ADMINISTRATIVE CONTRACTS - SALES CONTRACT - BETWEEN A SPANISH INDIVIDUAL AND A SPANISH MUNICIPALITY

UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES AND PRINCIPLES OF EUROPEAN CONTRACT LAW AS MEANS OF INTERPRETING DOMESTIC LAW (SPANISH LAW)

TERMINATION FOR BREACH OF CONTRACT - ADMISSIBLE WHEN DEFAULTING PARTY'S NON-PERFORMANCE SUBSTANTIALLY DEPRIVES AGGRIEVED PARTY OF WHAT IT WAS ENTITLED TO EXPECT UNDER THE CONTRACT (ART. 7.3.1(2)(A) UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES)

NON-PERFORMANCE EXCUSED - CONDITIONS (ART. 8:108 PRINCIPLES OF EUROPEAN CONTRACT LAW)
Spain
Audiencia Provincial de Lleida (Cataluna)

13-09-2007
SALES CONTRACT - BETWEEN TWO SPANISH INDIVIDUALS - UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES AND PRINCIPLES OF EUROPEAN CONTRACT LAW AS MEANS OF INTERPRETING DOMESTIC LAW (SPANISH LAW)

IMPOSSIBILITY OF PERFORMANCE - EFFECTS OF ORIGINAL IMPOSSIBILITY THE SAME AS THOSE OF SUPERVENING IMPOSSIBILITY (ART. 3.3 (1) UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES; ART. 4:102 PRINCIPLES OF EUROPEAN CONTRACT LAW)
Spain
Tribunal Supremo (sala de lo Civil, Sección 1ª)

03-12-2008
LONG-TERM CONTRACTS - SUPPLY CONTRACT - BETWEEN TWO SPANISH COMPANIES - GOVERNED BY SPANISH LAW

TERMINATION OF CONTRACT FOR FUNDAMENTAL BREACH - NOTION OF "FUNDAMENTAL BREACH" - REFERENCE TO ARTICLE 7.3.1 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES, ARTICLES 8:101 AND 8:103 PRINCIPLES OF EUROPEAN CONTRACT LAW AND ART. 49(1) CISG

BUYER'S FAILURE TO PAY THE PRICE - AMOUNTS TO FUNDAMENTAL BREACH - SELLER ENTITLED TO TERMINATION
Spain
Audiencia Provincial de Valencia (Sección 7ª)

06-03-2009
SALES CONTRACT - BETWEEN TWO SPANISH PARTIES - GOVERNED BY SPANISH LAW

TERMINATION OF CONTRACT FOR FUNDAMENTAL BREACH - NOTION OF "FUNDAMENTAL BREACH" - REFERENCE TO ARTICLE 7.3.1 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES, ARTICLES 8:101 AND 8:103 PRINCIPLES OF EUROPEAN CONTRACT LAW AND ARTICLE 49(1) CISG

BUYER'S FAILURE TO PAY THE REMAINDER OF THE PRICE - DOES NOT AMOUNT TO A FUNDAMENTAL BREACH
Spain
Audiencia Provincial Santa Cruz de Tenerife

07-03-2012
BARTER AGREEMENT - BETWEEN TWO SPANISH INDIVIDUALS - REFERENCE TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES AND PRINCIPLES OF EUROPEAN CONTRACT LAW TO INTERPRET APPLICABLE DOMESTIC LAW (SPANISH LAW) - REFERENCE TO THE TWO INSTRUMENTS JUSTIFIED "ON ACCOUNT OF THE COMMON ORIGIN OF THE PROVISIONS THEREIN CONTAINED"

TERMINATION FOR BREACH OF CONTRACT - ADMISSIBLE ONLY FOR BREACH OF FUNDAMENTAL NATURE (ART. 7.3.1 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES)
Spain
Tribunal Supremo

15-06-2015
BARTER AGREEMENT - BETWEEN SPANISH INDIVIDUALS - REFERENCE TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES AND PRINCIPLES OF EUROPEAN CONTRACT LAW TO INTERPRET APPLICABLE DOMESTIC LAW (SPANISH LAW)

TERMINATION OF CONTRACT FOR FUNDAMENTAL BREACH - NOTION OF "FUNDAMENTAL BREACH" - REFERENCE TO ARTICLE 7.3.1 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES, ARTICLES 8:101 AND 8:103 PRINCIPLES OF EUROPEAN CONTRACT LAW AND ARTICLE 49(1) CISG

NOTION OF FUNDAMENTAL BREACH - INDEPENDENT OF THE INTENTION OF THE BREACHING PARTY
United Kingdom
House of Lords

01-07-2009
LONG-TERM CONTRACTS - CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT - BETWEEN TWO ENGLISH COMPANIES - CONTRACT INTERPRETATION ACCORDING TO ENGLISH LAW - TRADITIONAL RULE THAT EVIDENCE OF PRE-CONTRACTUAL NEGOTIATIONS TO INTERPRET CONTRACT CLAUSE INADMISSIBLE CONFIRMED - DIFFERENT APPROACH INSPIRED BY UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES, PRINCIPLES OF EUROPEAN CONTRACT LAW AND CISG REFLECTING FRENCH PHILOSOPHY OF CONTRACT INTERPRETATION - AS SUCH INCOMPATIBLE WITH ENGLISH LAW
USA
United States District Court, S.D. Florida

30-03-2007
DISPUTE BETWEEN AN INDIAN EMPLOYEE AND A BERMUDAN EMPLOYER

NEW YORK CONVENTION ON THE RECOGNITION AND ENFORCEMENT OF FOREIGN ARBITRAL AWARDS - INTERPRETATION OF ARTICLE II(3) - REFERENCE TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES

ALLEGED INVALIDITY OF ARBITRATION CLAUSE BY REASON OF UNEQUAL BARGAINING POWER BETWEEN THE PARTIES - CLAIMANT'S REFERENCE TO ART. 3.10 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES [ART. 3.2.7 OF THE 2010 EDITION] AND TO ARTS. 4:109 AND 4:110 PRINCIPLES OF EUROPEAN CONTRACT LAW - CLAIM DISMISSED BECAUSE “IT IS DOUBTFUL THAT THERE EXISTS A PRECISE, UNIVERSAL DEFINITION OF THE UNEQUAL BARGAINING POWER DEFENSE THAT MAY BE APPLIED EFFECTIVELY ACROSS THE RANGE OF COUNTRIES THAT ARE PARTIES TO THE CONVENTION”
FINNISH 1
FOOD AND AGRICULTURE ORGANIZATION OF THE UNITED NATIONS (FAO) 1
FOOTBALL ASSOCIATION OF WALES 1
FRENCH 35
GEORGIAN 1
GERMAN 21
GERMAN DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC 1
GIBRALTAR 1
GREEK 4
HONG KONG 3
HUNGARIAN 3
INDIAN 8
INTERNATIONAL FUND FOR AGRICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT (IFAD) 1
INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATION 3
IRANIAN 10
IRAQI 1
ISRAELI 1
ITALIAN 37
IVORIAN 1
JAPANESE 5
KAZAKH 5
KOREAN 4
KUWAITI 2
KYRGYZ 1
LATIN AMERICAN 1
LEBANESE 3
LIBYAN 1
LIECHTENSTEIN 5
LITHUANIAN 16
LUXEMBOURG 1
MARSHALLESE 1
MEMBER FIRMS OF THE ANDERSEN WORLDWIDE ORGANIZATION 1
MEXICAN 4
MIDDLE EASTERN 4
MOLDAVIAN 1
MOROCCAN 1
NEW ZEALAND 5
NIGERIAN 1
NORTH AFRICAN 1
NORTH AMERICAN 1
NORWEGIAN 2
PAKISTANI 1
PANAMANIAN 1
PARAGUAYAN 18
PHILIPPINE 2
PLURALITY OF PARTIES OF DIFFERENT NATIONALITIES 7
POLISH 10
PORTUGUESE 3
PUERTO RICAN 1
ROMANIAN 5
RUSSIAN 95
RWANDESE 1
SALVADORAN 1
SCANDINAVIAN 1
SCOTTISH 1
SERBIAN 2
SINGAPOREAN 1
SLOVAKIAN 1
SLOVENIAN 1
SOUTH AFRICAN 1
SOUTH KOREAN 1
SOUTHWEST ASIAN 1
SPANISH 38
STATE OF THE FORMER SOVIET UNION 1
SWEDISH 8
SWISS 20
TURKISH 8
TURKMEN 1
UKRAINIAN 26
UNION OF EUROPEAN FOOTBALL ASSOCIATIONS (UEFA) 1
UNITED KINGDOM 3
UNITED NATIONS ORGANIZATION 2
UNITED STATES 38
URUGUAYAN 3
UZBEK 1
VENEZUELAN 3
VIETNAMESE 1
WEST INDIAN 2
WESTERN EUROPEAN 2

SELECTED CASES BY DOMESTIC LAW INVOLVED

KEYWORD Count of Cases
ALGERIAN LAW 1
ARGENTINIAN LAW 8
AUSTRALIAN LAW 14
AUSTRIAN LAW 3
BELORUSSIAN LAW 6
BRAZILIAN LAW 4
CHINESE LAW 14
COLOMBIAN LAW 5
COSTA RICAN LAW 4
CZECH LAW 1
DANISH LAW 1
DUTCH CARRIBEAN LAW 1
DUTCH LAW 7
ECUADORIAN LAW 1
EGYPTIAN LAW 1
ENGLISH LAW 16
FRENCH LAW 10
GERMAN LAW 6
GREEK LAW 1
INDIAN LAW 2
IRANIAN LAW 1
ITALIAN LAW 21
IVORIAN LAW 1
JAPANESE LAW 1
KAZAKH LAW 1
KUWAITI LAW 1
LAW OF A EASTERN EUROPEAN COUNTRY 1
LAW OF A NORDIC COUNTRY 1
LAW OF THE GERMAN DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC 1
LAW OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK 1
LEBANESE LAW 1
LIBYAN LAW 1
LITHUANIAN LAW 16
MEXICAN LAW 2
NEW ZEALAND LAW 5
NORWEGIAN LAW 2
PARAGUAYAN LAW 18
POLISH LAW 3
PORTUGUESE LAW 3
QUEBEC LAW 3
ROMANIAN LAW 2
RUSSIAN LAW 74
SCOTTISH LAW 1
SERBIAN LAW 1
SPANISH LAW 27
SWEDISH LAW 5
SWISS LAW 11
TURKISH LAW 2
TURKMEN LAW 1
UKRAINIAN LAW 20
URUGUAYAN LAW 3

BY INTERNATIONAL LAW INVOLVED

Arbitral Award
ICC International Court of Arbitration, Paris 7365/FMS

05-05-1997
STATE CONTRACTS - CONTRACT FOR THE SUPPLY AND INSTALLATION OF MILITARY EQUIPMENT - BETWEEN A UNITED STATES CORPORATION AND THE IRANIAN AIR FORCE - PARTIES' CHOICE OF DOMESTIC LAW (IRANIAN LAW) - AGREEMENT BY PARTIES AS TO COMPLEMENTARY AND SUPPLEMENTARY APPLICATION OF THE GENERAL PRINCIPLES OF INTERNATIONAL LAW AND TRADE USAGES - ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL REFERENCE TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES TO DETERMINE CONTENT OF SUCH GENERAL PRINCIPLES

HARDSHIP - RIGHT TO DEMAND TERMINATION OR ADAPTATION OF CONTRACT (ART. 6.2.3(4) UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES)

IMPLIED OBLIGATIONS - GOOD FAITH AND FAIR DEALING (ARTS. 5.1 AND 5.2 [ARTS. 5.1.1 AND 5.1.2 OF THE 2004 EDITION] UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES)

TERMINATION - RIGHT TO RESTITUTION (ART. 7.3.6 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES)

INTEREST - RIGHT TO INTEREST INDEPENDENT OF A FORMAL REQUEST BY AGGRIEVED PARTY (ART. 7.4.9 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES) - DOUBTFUL WHETHER THIS PROVISION CORRESPONDS TO GENERALLY ACCEPTED PRINCIPLES OF INTERNATIONAL LAW
Arbitral Award
ICC International Court of Arbitration 12111

06-01-2003
SALES CONTRACT - BETWEEN A RUMANIAN COMPANY AND AN ENGLISH COMPANY - REFERRING TO "INTERNATIONAL LAW" AS THE LAW GOVERNING THE CONTRACT - TO BE UNDERSTOOD AS REFERENCE TO THE GENERAL PRINCIPLES OF LAW AND THE LEX MERCATORIA - APPLICATION OF THE UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES (PARAGRAPH 3 OF THE PREAMBLE OF THE UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES)

PRINCIPLES OF EUROPEAN CONTRACT LAW - ACADEMIC EXERCISE PRELIMINARY TO A EUROPEAN CIVIL CODE - AS SUCH NOT YET APPLICABLE TO INTERNATIONAL COMMERCIAL CONTRACTS
Arbitral Award
Arbitration Institute of the Stockholm Chamber of Commerce

29-03-2005
STATE CONTRACTS - LONG-TERM CONTRACTS - GAS SUPPLY CONTRACT - BETWEEN A GIBRALTAR COMPANY AND A KYRGYZ STATE OWNED COMPANY -REFERENCE TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES TO INTERPRET APPLICABLE LAW (INTERNATIONAL LAW)

BUYER'S FAILURE TO PAY THE PRICE DUE TO INSOLVENCY CAUSED BY INTERFERENCE BY ITS COUNTRY'S GOVERNMENT - GOVERNMENT LIABLE FOR DAMAGES VIS-A-VIS SELLER

INTEREST - TO BE CALCULATED ON THE BASIS OF INTERNATIONAL RULES - APPLICATION OF ART. 7.4.9 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES CONSIDERED BY ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL "TO BE AN APPROPRIATE BASIS FOR DETERMINING THE INTEREST"
Arbitral Award
Ad hoc Arbitration, Brussels

19-08-2005
STATE CONTRACTS - SHARE PURCHASE AGREEMENT - BETWEEN A DUTCH COMPANY AND THE POLISH GOVERNMENT - TO BE DECIDED ON THE BASIS OF THE BILATERAL TREATY FOR THE PROTECTION OF INVESTMENTS AND "THE UNIVERSALLY ACKNOWLEDGED RULES AND PRINCIPLES OF INTERNATIONAL LAW" - REFERENCE TO THE UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES
Arbitral Award
Eritrea Ethiopia Claims Commission

17-08-2009
ERITREA ETHIOPIA CLAIMS COMMISSION - DAMAGES CLAIMS - REFERENCE TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES TO INTERPRET APPLICABLE INTERNATIONAL LAW

DETERMINATION OF COMPENSATION FOR UNCERTAIN LOSSES - ASSESSMENT AT DISCRETION OF ADJUDICATING BODY - REFERENCE TO ARTICLE 7.4.3(3) UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES
Arbitral Award
Ad hoc Arbitration, The Hague

30-03-2010
STATE CONTRACTS - LONG-TERM CONTRACTS - EXPLORATION AND EXPLOITATION AGREEMENT - BETWEEN TWO UNITED STATES COMPANIES AND THE ECUADORIAN GOVERNMENT – REFERENCE TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES TO INTERPRET APPLICABLE LAW (INTERNATIONAL LAW AS WELL AS ECUADORIAN LAW)

LOSS OF A CHANCE – CRITERION FOR DETERMINING AMOUNT OF DAMAGES IN CASE OF BREACH OF THE BIT DUE TO DENIAL OF JUSTICE – REFERENCE BY ONE OF THE PARTIES TO ARTICLE 7.4.3(2) OF UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES – ACCORDING TO ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL ONLY ADMISSIBLE WHERE AMOUNT OF LOSS NOT DETERMINABLE – REFERENCE TO COMMENT 2 TO ARTICLE 7.4.3 OF UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES

FORCE MAJEURE – HARDSHIP – DISTRIBUTION BETWEEN THE PARTIES IN A JUST AND EQUITABLE MANNER OF THE LOSSES AND GAINS RESULTING FROM UNFORESEEABLE EVENT – REFERENCE TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES (COMMENT ARTICLES 7.1.7 AND TO ARTICLES 6.2.2 – 6.2.3(2)) AND TO PRINCIPLES OF EUROPEAN CONTRACT LAW (ARTICLE 6:111(3)(B)) AS A MEANS TO INTERPRET ECUADORIAN LAW (ARTICLE 1563 ECUADORIAN CIVIL CODE)
International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID)
International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID)

19-01-2007
STATE CONTRACTS - LONG-TERM CONTRACTS - CONCESSION CONTRACT - BETWEEN A UNITED STATES-TURKISH CONSORTIUM AND THE TURKISH GOVERNMENT - REFERENCE TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES TO INTERPRET APPLICABLE LAW (INTERNATIONAL LAW)

CONCESSION CONTRACT CONCLUDED WITH TERMS LEFT OPEN - ONE PARTY ARGUED THAT NEVERTHELESS CONTRACT HAD BEEN VALIDLY CONCLUDED INVOKING ARTICLE 2.1.14 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES IN SUPPORT THEREOF - ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL BASICALLY CONFIRMS

ONE PARTY ARGUED THAT DUTY TO NEGOTIATE IN GOOD FAITH DOES NOT ENTAIL OBLIGATION TO REACH AGREEMENT INVOKING ARTICLE 2.1.15 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES - ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL BASICALLY CONFIRMS
International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID)
International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID)

29-07-2008
STATE CONTRACTS - LONG-TERM CONTRACTS - CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT - BETWEEN A CONGOLESE COMPANY CONTROLLED BY A UNITED STATES COMPANY AND THE CONGOLESE GOVERNMENT - REFERENCE TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES TO INTERPRET APPLICABLE LAW (INTERNATIONAL LAW)

DISPUTE OVER THE LATTER'S FAILURE TO PAY THE FULL AMOUNT OF THE PRICE OF A CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT ENTERED INTO WITH THE FORMER

JURISDICTION OF ICSID ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL CHALLENGED ON THE GROUND THAT NO CONTRACT HAD EVER BEEN CONCLUDED OR HAD NOT BEEN CONCLUDED IN WRITING - OBJECTION REJECTED - REFERENCE TO ARTICLES 2.1.1 AND 1.2 OF UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES 2004

JURISDICTION OF ICSID ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL CHALLENGED ON THE GROUND THAT DISPUTE HAD ARISEN WHEN COMPANY WAS NOT YET CONTROLLED BY A US NATIONAL - OBJECTION ACCEPTED - MERE NON-PERFORMANCE AS DEFINED IN ARTICLE 7.1.1 OF UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES 2004 AMOUNTS TO DISPUTE

DISSENTING OPINION BY ONE OF THE ARBITRATORS - DECISION IF AND WHEN TO TRANSFORM OBLIGOR'S FAILURE TO PERFORM INTO DISPUTE UP TO OBLIGEE - REFERENCE TO ARTICLES 7.1.4 AND 7.1.5(1) OF UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES 2004
International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID)
International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID)

01-09-2009
APPLICATION FOR ANNULMENT OF AN ICSID AWARD RENDERED BETWEEN A UNITED STATES CORPORATION AND THE ARGENTINIAN GOVERNMENT - REFERENCE TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES TO INTERPRET APPLICABLE LAW (INTERNATIONAL LAW)

DETERMINATION OF EXTENT OF HARM - DISCRETIONARY POWER OF COURTS WHERE AMOUNT CANNOT BE ESTABLISHED WITH SUFFICIENT DEGREE OF CERTAINTY - REFERENCE BY CLAIMANT TO ARTICLE 7.4.3 (3) UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES - STANDARD OF COMPENSATION CONFIRMED BY BOTH ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL AND AD HOC COMMITTEE
International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID)
International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID)

03-03-2010
STATE CONTRACTS - LONG-TERM CONTRACTS - CONCESSION AGREEMENT -BETWEEN GREEK AND ISRAELI INVESTORS AND THE GEORGIAN GOVERNMENT - CONCERNING THE CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF OIL PIPELINES - REFERENCE TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES TO INTERPRET APPLICABLE LAW (INTERNATIONAL LAW)

DISPUTE BETWEEN PARTIES AS TO SCOPE OF THE CONCESSION - WHETHER EXTRINSIC EVIDENCE ADMISSIBLE FOR THE PURPOSE OF CONSTRUING THE CONCESSION AGREEMENT - REFERENCE BY ONE OF THE PARTIES TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES IN SUPPORT OF ADMISSIBILITY - ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL, THOUGH WITHOUT EXPRESSLY REFERRING TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES, BASICALLY CONCURRED
International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID)
International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID)

16-06-2010
STATE CONTRACTS - LONG-TERM CONTRACTS - CONCESSION CONTRACT - BETWEEN FRENCH AND ARGENTINIAN COMPANIES AND THE MEXICAN GOVERNMENT – BIT AND GENERAL INTERNATIONAL LAW APPLICABLE - REFERENCE TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES IN SUPPORT OF GENERAL PRINCIPLE OF INTERNATIONAL LAW

DAMAGES – COMPENSATION DUE ONLY FOR HARM, INCLUDING FUTURE HARM, ESTABLISHED WITH REASONABLE DEGREE OF CERTAINTY – REFERENCE TO ART. 36 ILC DRAFT ARTICLES ON RESPONSIBILITY OF STATES FOR INTERNATIONALLY WRONGFUL ACTS OF 2001 AND TO ART. 7.4.3 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES
International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID)
International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID)

30-07-2010
STATE CONTRACTS - LONG-TERM CONTRACTS - CONCESSION CONTRACT - BETWEEN FRENCH AND SPANISH INVESTORS AND THE ARGENTINIAN GOVERNMENT - DUE TO ARGENTINA'S FINANCIAL CRISIS ARGENTINIAN AUTHORITIES ADOPTED A SERIES OF MEASURES NEGATIVELY AFFECTING PROFITABILITY OF FOREIGN INVESTORS' INVESTMENT - ALLEGED VIOLATION BY ARGENTINA OF BILATERAL INVESTMENT TREATIES - REFERENCE TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES TO INTERPRET APPLICABLE LAW (INTERNATIONAL LAW)

RESPONDENT INVOKING FORCE MAJEURE AS EXCUSE FOR VIOLATION OF BIT - OBJECTION REJECTED ON THE GROUND THAT RESPONDENT WAS PARTLY RESPONSIBLE FOR ITS FINANCIAL CRISIS

REQUEST FOR RE-NEGOTIATION OF TERMS OF CONCESSION - IN ACCORDANCE WITH INTERNATIONAL STANDARDS IMPOSING IN LONG-TERM CONTRACTS IN THE EVENT OF HARDSHIP AN OBLIGATION TO NEGOTIATE CONTRACT ADAPTATION - REFERENCE TO ARTICLE 6:111 PRINCIPLES OF EUROPEAN CONTRACT LAW AND ARTICLES 6.2.2 AND 6.2.3 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES
International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID)
International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID)

31-10-2011
DISPUTE BETWEEN A UNITED STATES INVESTOR AND THE ARGENTINIAN GOVERNMENT - CONCERNING ALLEGED VIOLATION BY THE LATTER OF BILATERAL INVESTMENT TREATY (BIT) - ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL DECIDED TO APPLY THE BIT AND "INTERNATIONAL LAW, WHEN APPLICABLE" - REFERENCE TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES "A SORT OF INTERNATIONAL RESTATEMENT OF THE LAW OF CONTRACTS REFLECTING RULES AND PRINCIPLES APPLIED BY THE MAJORITY OF NATIONAL LEGAL SYSTEMS".

DEFENDANT INVOKING FORCE MAJEURE AS EXCUSE FOR VIOLATION OF BIT - OBJECTION REJECTED ON GROUND OF GENERAL PRINCIPLE OF "PRECLUSION OF WRONGFULNESS" - REFERENCE TO ARTICLES 6.2.2, 7.1.6 AND 7.1.7 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES
International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID)
International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID)

01-06-2012
DISPUTE BETWEEN A UNITED STATES COMPANY AND THE SALVADORAN GOVERNMENT OVER THE LATTER'S ARBITRARY REFUSAL TO GRANT THE FORMER A MINING EXPLOITATION CONCESSION - REFERENCE TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES TO INTERPRET APPLICABLE LAW (INTERNATIONAL LAW)

JURISDICTION OF ICSID ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL CHALLENGED ON THE GROUND THAT DISPUTE HAD ARISEN WHEN CLAIMANT WAS NOT YET A UNITED STATES COMPANY

BREACH OF AN OBLIGATION UNDER INVESTMENT TREATY BY OMISSION - EXPLICIT REFUSAL TO GRANT CONCESSION NOT NECESSARY - MERE FAILURE TO RESPOND TO APPLICATION SUFFICIENT - REFERENCE TO ARTICLE 7.1.1 UNDIROIT PRINCIPLES
Iranian-U.S. Arbitral Tribunal
Iranian-U.S. Arbitral Tribunal (Full Tribunal)

02-07-2014
DISPUTE BETWEEN IRAN AND THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA CONCERNING ALLEGED BREACH BY UNITED STATES OF ITS OBLIGATION UNDER ARTICLE VII, PARAGRAPH 2, OF THE 1981 CLAIMS SETTLEMENT DECLARATION ESTABLISHING THE IRAN-UNITED STATES CLAIMS TRIBUNAL – ACCORDING TO ARTICLE V OF THE 1981 CLAIMS SETTLEMENT DECLARATION TRIBUNAL BOUND TO “DECIDE ALL CASES ON THE BASIS OF RESPECT FOR LAW, APPLYING SUCH CHOICE OF LAW RULES AND PRINCIPLES OF COMMERCIAL AND INTERNATIONAL LAW AS THE TRIBUNAL DETERMINES TO BE APPLICABLE, TAKING INTO ACCOUNT RELEVANT USAGES OF TRADE, CONTRACT PROVISIONS AND CHANGED CIRCUMSTANCES”

UNITED STATES ORDERED TO PAY IRAN DAMAGES PLUS INTEREST – INTEREST CALCULATED “AT AN ANNUAL RATE EQUAL TO THE AVERAGE PRIME BANK LENDING RATE IN THE UNITED STATES” – TRIBUNAL SO DECIDED “[…] ALSO MINDFUL OF ARTICLE 7.4.9 (2) OF THE UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES 2010”
Netherlands
Gerechtshof Den Haag

11-09-2013
STATE CONTRACTS - LONG-TERM CONTRACTS - SUPPLY CONTRACT - BETWEEN AN ENGLISH COMPANY AND AN IRANIAN GOVERNMENT AGENCY - REFERENCE TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES TO INTERPRET APPLICABLE LAW (INTERNATIONAL LAW)

REQUEST FOR SETTING ASIDE OF ARBITRAL AWARDS APPLYING THE UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES AS RULES OF LAW GOVERNING THE SUBSTANCE OF THE DISPUTE - REQUEST REJECTED BY COURT (DUTCH COURT)

APPLICATION BY ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL ON ITS OWN MOTION OF ARTICLE 7.4.3(3) UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES - OBJECTION THAT ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL HAD EXCEEDED ITS MANDATE - REJECTED

LIMITATION PERIODS - A PARTY'S OBJECTION THAT OTHER PARTY'S CLAIMS WERE TIME-BARRED REJECTED BY ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL AS THE 1994 EDITION OF UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES DID NOT ADDRESS THE ISSUE

LIMITATION PERIODS - ARGUMENT THAT THE ISSUE WAS ADDRESSED IN THE SUBSEQUENT 2004 EDITION OF UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES REJECTED - RETROACTIVE EFFECT OF SUBSEQUENT EDITIONS OF UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES DENIED