Data
- Date:
- 08-08-2024
- Country:
- Chile
- Number:
- 65.019 – 2023
- Court:
- Supreme Court
- Parties:
- Sunshine Raisins S.A.C. v. Sociedad Comercial El Laberinto SpA
Keywords
BUYER'S OBLIGATIONS - PAYMENT OF PRICE (ART. 53 CISG) - SELLER'S RIGHT TO REQUIRE PERFORMANCE OF SELLER'S OBLIGATIONS (ART. 62 CISG)
Abstract
[CLOUT Case no. 2245]
Sunshine Raisins S.A.C., a Peruvian company (the “seller”), entered a contract with a Chilean company, Sociedad Comercial El Laberinto SpA (the “buyer”), for the sale of raisins (the “products”) valued at US$ 130,000. The buyer stated that the products arrived in Chile in poor condition and that due to the seller’s complete lack of interest in resolving this issue, the products were ruined and used as animal feed. The buyer paid the seller US$ 10,000 solely as compensation for the seller’s shipping costs.
The seller initiated proceedings before the Primer Juzgado de Letras de San Felipe (Court of First Instance No. 1 of San Felipe, the “Court of First Instance”), seeking full payment under the CISG. The Court of First Instance’s judgment – affirmed outright by the Corte de Apelaciones de Valparaíso (the “Court of Appeal Valparaíso”) – granted the claim and ordered the buyer to pay the seller the outstanding amount of the sum due in local currency. The buyer appealed to the Corte Suprema de Justicia de Chile (the “Chilean Supreme Court”), claiming to set aside the appealed judgment and render a new judgment upholding its statute of limitations defense under Chilean
law, thereby dismissing the seller’s time-barred claim.
During the first instance’s proceedings, the seller maintained that the CISG constituted the applicable legal regime for the dispute. The buyer, however, stated that while payment obligations originate from an international sales contract, the issuance of an invoice transforms the legal nature of the obligation into a distinct debt collection matter governed by domestic law. Specifically, the buyer argued that since the CISG nowhere establishes provisions regulating invoice collection procedures, Chilean domestic law should apply. Under Chilean law, a special one-year statute of
limitations applies to claims between merchants and suppliers, which the buyer
asserted had already expired.
The Court of First Instance determined the CISG to be applicable as both parties were from Contracting States; and the dispute concerned an international sale of goods under the CISG. The Court specifically invoked Art. 62 CISG, which expressly grants sellers the right to require payment upon buyer’s breach, thereby rejecting the application of Chilean domestic law. The Court further rejected the statute of limitations defense, clarifying that the seller’s action constituted an ordinary claim for contractual performance rather than a special enforcement proceeding for invoice
collection. In examining the payment obligation of the buyer, the Court applied Art. 53 CISG, which establishes the buyer’s fundamental duty to pay the contract price. The evidentiary record demonstrated the buyer’s failure to: (1) prove timely payment as required under the contract; or (2) provide any credible evidence of payment.
As to the buyer’s defense of the seller’s unperformed contractual obligations, the Court of First Instance noted that under Arts. 30 and 34 CISG, the seller must deliver goods that conform to the contract in quantity, quality and description. However, the buyer submitted no evidence to prove the products were nonconforming when received, as required by the burden of proof rules. The Court further found the buyer failed to prove it gave timely notice of the lack of conformity by specifying the nature of the defects within a reasonable time after discovery, as required by
Art. 39 CISG.
After reviewing the buyer’s appeal, the Supreme Court declared it inadmissible. The Supreme Court affirmed that the buyer failed to specifically demonstrate how the alleged legal errors in the appealed judgment extended to decisive legal provisions, namely CISG Arts. 30, 34, 39, 53 and 62.
Fulltext
}}
Source
CASE LAW ON UNCITRAL TEXTS (CLOUT) (http://www.uncitral.org/uncitral/en/case_law.html), A/CN.9/SER.C/ABSTRACTS/CISG/2245}}