Data
- Date:
- 24-03-1992
- Country:
- Hungary
- Number:
- AZ 12.G.41.471/1991
- Court:
- Metropolitan Court of Budapest
- Parties:
- Unknown
Keywords
FORMAL REQUIREMENTS - DECLARATION UNDER ART. 96 CISG - FORMAL REQUIREMENTS DETERMINED BY APPLICABLE DOMESTIC LAW (ART. 12 CISG)
OFFER - DEFINITENESS OF TERMS (ART. 14(1) CISG) - PRACTICES ESTABLISHED BETWEEN THE PARTIES BINDING NATURE (ART. 9(1) CISG)
BUYER'S OBLIGATIONS - PAYMENT OF THE PRICE (ART. 53 CISG)
INTEREST - RIGHT TO INTEREST IN CASE OF LATE PAYMENT OF PRICE (ART. 78 CISG) - INTEREST RATE - STATUTORY RATE OF CREDITOR'S COUNTRY
Abstract
A German seller and a Hungarian buyer, who had had a commercial relationship for a long time, agreed on a sale of goods over the telephone. After the delivery of the goods, the buyer refused to pay the price alleging that no contract had been concluded as it was made over the telephone.
The Court held that CISG applied, as Hungarian private international law rules did not govern matters settled by an international treaty to which Hungary was a party. CISG was found to be applicable as the parties had their places of business in contracting States (Germany and Hungary) (Art. 1(1)(a) CISG).
The Court, in determining whether a contract could be concluded over the telephone, considered the formal requirements of the contract. As Hungary had pursuant to Art. 96 CISG made a declaration in accordance with Art. 12 CISG, it was necessary for the Court to determine whether, according to the applicable domestic law, the contract at hand had to be concluded in writing. The Court, applying Hungarian private international law rules, found that German law was applicable and that it was not necessary for the contract to be concluded in writing. As such, the Court held that a contract could be concluded over the telephone.
The Court held that the offer was sufficiently definite (Art. 14(1) CISG), as the quality, quantity and price of the goods were impliedly fixed by the practices established between the parties (Art. 9(1) CISG), whereby the German seller had repeatedly delivered the same type of goods ordered by the buyer who had paid the price after delivery.
The seller was awarded the purchase price plus interest at the rate fixed by the law of the country of the seller (creditor).
Fulltext
[Not yet available]}}
Source
Original in Hungarian:
- Unpublished
Commented on by:
- A. Vida, Praxis des Internationalen Privat- und Verfahrensrecht (IPRax), 1993, 263}}