Data

Date:
11-04-2006
Country:
Egypt
Number:
--
Court:
Supreme Court
Parties:
Golden Marble for Marble and Granite v. Mondeal Granite

Keywords

EVIDENCE OF RECEIPT OF THE GOODS - CAN BE GIVEN BY ANY MEANS (ART. 11 CISG)

Abstract

[CLOUT Case no. 2290. Abstract prepared by Legal Clinic of Ain Shams University]

Golden Marble for Marble and Granite, a company based in Egypt (the “buyer”), purchased marble from Mondeal Granite, a company based in Italy (the “seller”), pursuant to a contract for the sale of marble. The price of the sold marble was to be paid in two invoices. The buyer paid part of the price but refrained from paying the rest. The seller filed a lawsuit seeking payment of the outstanding amount. The Court
of First Instance rendered a judgment ordering the payment of the outstanding amount, which was upheld by the Cairo Court of Appeal. Consequently, the buyer challenged the Court of Appeal judgment before the Court of Cassation (the “Court”) , alleging that the documents and invoices submitted by the seller did not provide any evidence of the receipt of the goods. The buyer argued that the judgment should be
reversed for failure to state a claim.
The Court considered two grounds for the cassation.
Firstly, it examined the law applicable to the contract. The Court ruled, on its own motion, that the contract was governed by the CISG because the buyer and the seller had their places of business in Contracting States (article 1(1)(a) of the CISG).
Although the parties did not explicitly agree to the application of the CISG in their contract, the Court found that it automatically applied.
Secondly, the Court examined the issue pertaining to the evidence of the receipt of the goods. It held that whenever one of the parties offers evidence, it has a probative value unless it is rebutted by the other party because the burden of proof is shifted thereto as a result of admitting the evidence. Noting articles 7(1), 8, 11 and 13 of the CISG, the Court stated that the receipt of delivery could be proven by any means,
including faxes, messages or other communications. In the case at hand, the seller supported its claim by providing the fax requesting the payment and the two invoices.

The Court held that the lower court had failed to apply the CISG and did not assess the evidentiary rules and the resulting shifting of the burden of proof. Accordingly, the Court reversed the judgment of the Court of Appeal.

Fulltext

}}

Source

CLOUT CASE A/CN.9/SER.C/ABSTRACTS/CISG/2290

Original in Arabic and English translation:
- available at www.cisg-online.org}}