Data
- Date:
- 29-10-2019
- Country:
- China
- Number:
- (2019) Beijing 02 Min Zhong No. 12136
- Court:
- Intermediate People's Court Beijing
- Parties:
- Chentang (Beijing) Technology Co., Ltd. v. Societe des Anciens Etablissements Lucien Geismar SAS
Keywords
LACK OF CONFORMITY - CONTRACTUAL AGREEMENT FOR DIFFERENT PERIOD OF GUARANTEE (ART. 39(2)CISG)
BUYER'S RIGHT TO RELY ON LACK OF CONFORMITY - FAILURE TO GIVE TIMELY NOTICE (ART. 39 (1) CISG)
Abstract
[Draft abstract prepared by Cai Yujie, Hu Jingdan and Yin Ao, ZUEL-SUR School of Law and Economics, Wuhan]
A Chinese buyer entered a contract with a French seller for the purchase of equipment to be resold to a final customer. After delivery, the final buyer complained to the Chinese company about the quality of the goods. In turn, the Chinese company claimed that the seller had committed a fundamental contract breach, and that payment for the goods had to be reimbursed.
As to the applicable law, the Court stated that since both China and France are parties to the Convention, and the parties had not explicitly excluded its application, the contract should be governed by CISG.
Concerning the merits, the Court ruled that the buyer had lost the right to raise quality objections related to the equipment because its notice to the seller was given after that the contractual guarantee period had expired. In reaching such a conclusion, the Court established, inter alia, that contrary to what was put forward by the buyer, the email communication between the final buyer and the seller could not be considered as a notice given by himself.
Fulltext
}}
Source
}}