Data
- Date:
- 29-11-2023
- Country:
- Mexico
- Number:
- 3267/2023
- Court:
- Suprema Corte de Justicia de la Nación (Primera Sala)
- Parties:
- --
Keywords
LONG-TERM CONTRACTS - COMMERCIAL PREMISES LEASE AGREEMENT – BETWEEN TWO MEXICAN PARTIES – UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES APPLIED IN ORDER TO INTERPRET APPLICABLE DOMESTIC LAW (MEXICAN LAW)
AGGRIEVED PARTY’S DUTY TO MITIGATE HARM – REFERENCE TO ART. 7.4.8 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES AND ART. 77 CISG.
Abstract
The First Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation resolved a dispute arising from a commercial premises lease agreement, the performance of which was breached by the lessee. The lessor filed an ordinary lawsuit to obtain payment of damages arising from this breach.
The Court focused its analysis on the principle of mitigation of damage, provided for in Article 77 of the CISG (Vienna Convention on the International Sale of Goods), as well as Article 7.4.8 of the UNIDROIT Principles on International Commercial Contracts, invoked as a complementary interpretative reference.
Although the contract in dispute was not an international sale, the court considered the international normative standard on the duty to mitigate damage applicable by analogy, given that it is a recognized general principle in contemporary contract law.
The Court emphasized that the party that has suffered a breach cannot remain passive in the face of the damage, but is obliged to take reasonable measures to reduce its impact. In this regard, it concluded that the lessee had not demonstrated that it had taken any concrete actions to avoid further losses, such as occupying the property, initiating operations, or obtaining administrative permits, and therefore its inactivity should be considered relevant to reducing the applicable compensation.
Excerpts of interest:
a) The party claiming breach of contract must take reasonable measures, given the circumstances, to reduce the loss, including lost profits, resulting from the breach. (Article 77 CISG)
b) In this regard, it mentions that there is no evidence that the lessee had taken any action to this effect, as indicated in the aforementioned Article 77, since it only entered into the contract, but did not pay rent or take possession of the property, nor did it obtain the necessary permits for its operation or any improvements.
English translation of the Spanish abstract written by Juan José Conforto Sarrias for CISG Spain.
Fulltext
}}
Source
Abstract and fulltext in Spanish:
- available at the University of Carlos III website, http://www.cisgspanish.com}}