Data

Date:
00-00-2009
Country:
Greece
Number:
4505/2009
Court:
Multi-Member Court of First Instance of Athens
Parties:
--

Keywords

DAMAGES (ART. 74 CISG)- LOSS TO PROFESSIONAL REPUTATION NOT FORESEEABLE AT THE TIME OF CONTRACT CONCLUSION - MORAL DAMAGES NOT RECOVERABLE UNDER CISG

Abstract

A Dutch company (seller) concluded a contract with a Greek company (buyer) for the supply of raw material to be used in the manufacture of bullet-proof vests for the Greek Army and Police. According to the contract, the delivery would take place in installments and the price would be paid partly in advance against a bank guarantee and partly within thirty days after receipt of an invoice following each delivery. The seller delivered in ten shipments almost all of the goods ordered and the buyer accepted it without objection. Nevertheless, the buyer failed to pay the price of the last four shipments, and during a meeting with the seller, told the seller not to deliver the last installment as the vests manufactured with the material supplied had been found defective. On several occasions the seller asked the buyer to pay the outstanding amount and declared that it was willing to find a solution to remedy the defects in the material. Finally, the buyer acknowledged the seller’s claim, but affirmed that it had been reduced by the amount corresponding to the expenses it had incurred in conducting the tests on the vests and repairing them. The seller then sued the buyer claming payment of the outstanding invoices and the price of the goods the buyer had refused to take over. Moreover, both seller and buyer asked for moral damages due to loss of their professional reputation, as well as publication of the judgment once rendered in two State daily newspapers.

The Court ruled that it had international jurisdiction over the case in application of EC Regulation no. 44/2001 on Jurisdiction and the Recognition and Enforcement of Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters, and that CISG was applicable according to Art. 1(1)a thereof.

As to the merits of the case, the Court rejected the parties’ requests for moral damages, since loss to their professional reputation had not been foreseeable at the time of the conclusion of the contract (Art. 74 CISG). Likewise, the Court rejected the parties’ request to have the judgment published in two State daily newspapers since such a measure is not contemplated in CISG.

Moreover, the Court dismissed the buyer’s claims. In so doing, it held that when the risk passed to the buyer (Art. 68 CISG), the goods conformed as to quantity and quality with the contractual requirements and had no actual defects (Arts. 35 and 36 CISG). Therefore, the seller was not responsible for breach of contract vis-à-vis the buyer.

Fulltext

}}

Source

English Translation of excerpts from the decision:
- available at the University of Pace website, http://www.cisg.law.pace.edu}}