Data
- Date:
- 03-04-2018
- Country:
- Arbitral Award
- Number:
- 248/2016
- Court:
- International Arbitration Court of the Chamber of Commerce and Industry of the Russian Federation
- Parties:
- --
Keywords
SALES CONTRACT - BETWEEN A RUSSIAN BUYER AND A UKRAINIAN SELLER - CHOICE OF LAW CLAUSE REFERRING TO "INTERNATIONAL LAW" - ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL DECIDED TO APPLY CISG AND, FOR QUESTIONS NOT PROVIDED FOR IN THE CISG, THE UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES SINCE THE PARTIES EXPRESS THEIR INTENTION TO EXCLUDE THE APPLICATION OF ANY NATIONAL LAW
RIGHT TO INTEREST - REFERENCE TO ART. 7.4.9 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES IN ORDER TO DETERMINE THE INTEREST RATE
Abstract
A Russian joint-stock company (the claimant) and a Ukrainian state holding company (the respondent) entered into a contract for the delivery of goods, according to which the respondent undertook to deliver the goods to the claimant within the framework of the Agreement between the Government of the Russian Federation and the Government of Ukraine on Industrial and Scientific-Technical Cooperation between Enterprises in Defense Sectors of Industry (Moscow, 18 November 1993).
Due to Ukraine's withdrawal from this Agreement, the seller has only partially fulfilled its obligation to deliver the goods. The buyer has decided to file an action with the International Commercial Arbitration Court at the Chamber of Commerce and Industry of the Russian Federation (ICAC-RF) because of the non-return of the advance payment it made.
The choice of law clause included in the contract provided for the application of international law. The parties explained that this choice manifested their intention to exclude the application of any national law. The arbitral tribunal then decided to apply the United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods of April 11, 1980 (CISG) and the Unidroit Principles for matters not covered by the CISG.
The arbitrators granted the claimant's requests almost in their entirety. They referred to Article 7.4.9 of the Unidroit Principles in determining the amount of interest.
(Abstract kindly provided by François Mansourati)
Fulltext
}}
Source
Maria Vladimirovna Radetskaya, 'Buyer (Russian Federation) v. Supplier (Ukraine) (Award), ICAC Case No. 248/2016, 3 April 2018', in Aleksey Nikolaevich Zhiltsov (ed), Commercial Arbitration, The Chamber of Commerce and Industry of the Russian Federation 2019, Volume 2019 Issue 2(2), pp. 310 - 342}}