SELECTED CASES BY TYPE OF CONTRACT INVOLVED
SELECTED CASES BY NATIONALITY OF THE PARTIES
| KEYWORD | Count of Cases |
|---|---|
| AFRICAN | 6 |
| ALGERIAN | 1 |
| ARGENTINIAN | 14 |
| AUSTRALIAN | 17 |
| AUSTRIAN | 10 |
| BAHAMIAN | 1 |
| BELGIAN | 6 |
| BELORUSSIAN | 7 |
| BERMUDIAN | 1 |
| BRAZILIAN | 9 |
| BRITISH VIRGIN ISLAND | 1 |
| BULGARIAN | 1 |
| CANADIAN | 13 |
| CENTRAL EUROPEAN | 1 |
| CHILEAN | 4 |
| CHINESE | 43 |
| COLOMBIAN | 8 |
| CONGOLESE | 1 |
| COSTA RICAN | 5 |
| CYPRIOT | 8 |
| CZECH | 1 |
| DANISH | 3 |
| DUTCH | 23 |
| DUTCH ANTILLEAN | 1 |
| EAST ASIAN | 1 |
| EASTERN EUROPEAN | 6 |
| ECUADORIAN | 2 |
| EGYPTIAN | 1 |
| ENGLISH | 42 |
| ESTONIAN | 2 |
| EUROPEAN | 59 |
|
Arbitral Award Ad hoc Arbitration, New York 00-00-0000 SALES CONTRACT - BETWEEN THE UNITED NATIONS ORGANIZATION AND A EUROPEAN COMPANY - IN THE CONTEXT OF A PEACE-KEEPING MISSION IN AFRICA - CONTRACT SILENT AS TO APPLICABLE LAW - PARTIES AGREED ON APPLICATION OF CISG AND UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES | |
|
Arbitral Award ICC International Court of Arbitration, New York 16314 00-00-0000 GAS TURBINE ENGINES SUPPLY CONTRACT - BETWEEN A UNITED STATES COMPANY AND A SHIPYARD INCORPORATED IN A EUROPEAN COUNTRY - GOVERNED BY THE LAW OF COUNTRY X IN EUROPE VIOLATION OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS - CONTRACT INTERPRETATION UNDER APPLICABLE DOMESTIC LAW - REFERENCE TO ART. 2.1.17 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES AND TO ART. 2:105 PECL TO CONFIRM THE RULE EXPRESSED BY THE APPLICABLE LAW - EXTRINSIC EVIDENCE MAY BE RELIED UPON TO INTERPRET THE CONTRACT AS FAR AS THE COMMON INTENTION OF THE PARTIES CANNOT BE DETERMINED BY THE PLAIN WORDING OF THE CONTRACT | |
|
Arbitral Award ICC International Court of Arbitration ICC-FA-2020-226 00-00-0000 SUPPLY CONTRACT - BETWEEN TWO EUROPEAN PARTIES - CHOICE OF LAW CLAUSE IN FAVOUR OF THE LAW OF THE SUPPLIERS'S COUNTRY - ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL APPLIES CISG AS PART OF THE LAW OF THE SUPPLIER'S COUNTRY GOOD FAITH - BREACH OF THE DUTY OF LOYALTY BETWEEN CONTRACTING PARTIES - EXPRESSION OF A GENERAL PRINCIPLE OF GOOD COMMERCIAL PRACTICE REFLECTED IN ART. 1.7 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES GOOD FAITH - REFERENCE TO THE UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES IN ORDER TO INTERPRET ART. 7(1) CISG | |
|
Arbitral Award Schiedsgericht Berlin 00-00-1990 SALES CONTRACT - BETWEEN AN ECONOMIC UNIT OF THE GERMAN DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC AND AN ECONOMIC UNIT OF AN ANOTHER EASTERN EUROPEAN COUNTRY - CONTRACT GOVERNED BY DOMESTIC LAW (LAW OF THE GERMAN DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC) HARDSHIP - RADICAL CHANGE IN THE ORIGINAL CONTRACTUAL EQUILIBRIUM - REFERENCE BY ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL TO THE UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES (ARTS. 6.2.1, 6.2.2, 6.2.3) TO DEMONSTRATE THAT SOLUTION REACHED UNDER APPLICABLE DOMESTIC LAW CORRESPONDED TO INTERNATIONALLY ACCEPTED PRINCIPLES | |
|
Arbitral Award ICC International Court of Arbitration - Basle 8128 00-00-1995 SALES CONTRACT - BETWEEN AN AUSTRIAN SELLER AND A SWISS BUYER - GOVERNED BY CISG FUNDAMENTAL BREACH (ART. 25 CISG) - SELLER'S FAILURE TO GIVE BUYER CORRECT INSTRUCTIONS AS TO PACKAGING FUNDAMENTAL BREACH (ART. 25 CISG) - LATE DELIVERY - KNOWLEDGE OF SELLER THAT DATE FOR DELIVERY IS ESSENTIAL TO BUYER FIXING OF ADDITIONAL TIME FOR PERFORMANCE NOT NECESSARY AVOIDANCE - DECLARATION OF AVOIDANCE - INVITATION TO PERFORM UNDER THREAT OF AVOIDANCE - NO SUCCESSIVE DECLARATION NEEDED DAMAGES - SUBSTITUTE TRANSACTION - REASONABLENESS OF SUBSTITUTE TRANSACTION (ART. 75 CISG) - REQUIREMENTS INTEREST (ART. 78 CISG) - INTEREST ON OTHER SUMS IN ARREARS - ACCRUAL INTEREST - RULE OF AVERAGE BANK LENDING RATE TO PRIME BORROWERS CONTAINED IN ART. 7.4.9 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES AND ART. 4.507 OF PRINCIPLES OF EUROPEAN CONTRACT LAW AS A GENERAL PRINCIPLE UNDERLYING CISG (ART. 7(2) CISG) - LIBOR RATE APPLICABLE | |
|
Arbitral Award ICC International Court of Arbitration (Paris) 9474 00-02-1999 STATE CONTRACTS - SERVICE CONTRACT - ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL REQUESTED TO APPLY “GENERAL STANDARDS AND RULES OF INTERNATIONAL CONTRACTS” – REFERENCE TO CISG “WHICH EMBODIES UNIVERSAL PRINCIPLES APPLICABLE IN INTERNATIONAL CONTRACTS” AND TO THE UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES AND TO THE PRINCIPLES OF EUROPEAN CONTRACT LAW AS “RECENT DOCUMENTS THAT EXPRESS THE GENERAL STANDARDS AND RULES OF COMMERCIAL LAW”. AVOIDANCE OF CONTRACT FOR FRAUDULENT NON-DISCLOSURE OF CIRCUMSTANCES (SEE ARTICLES 3.5 AND 3.8 OF THE UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES; ARTICLE 4.107 OF THE PRINCIPLES OF EUROPEAN CONTRACT LAW). TERMINATION OF CONTRACT FOR NON-PERFORMANCE – NOTICE TO BE GIVEN WITHIN A REASONABLE TIME (SEE ARTICLE 7.3.2 OF THE UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES). | |
|
Arbitral Award ICC International Court of Arbitration 9759 00-08-1999 ARBITRATION AGREEMENT - BETWEEN A FINANCIAL INSTITUTION BASED IN A EUROPEAN COUNTRY AND A COMPANY BASED IN A SOUTHWEST ASIAN COUNTRY ARBITRATION AGREEMENT – TO BE INTERPRETED SO AS TO GIVE EFFECT TO IT RATHER THAN TO DEPRIVE IT OF ANY EFFECT (ARTICLE 4.5 OF THE UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES). | |
|
Arbitral Award ICC International Court of Arbitration 10114 00-03-2000 LONG-TERM CONTRACTS - SERVICE CONTRACT - BETWEEN A CHINESE COMPANY AND AN EASTERN EUROPEAN CAR MANUFACTURER APPLICATION OF THE UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES AS EXPRESSION OF “INTERNATIONAL PRACTICES” | |
|
Arbitral Award ICC International Court of Arbitration, Geneva 9797 28-07-2000 INTER-FIRM AGREEMENT - BETWEEN THE MEMBER FIRMS OF THE ANDERSEN WORLDWIDE ORGANIZATION - ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL REQUESTED BY PARTIES TO DECIDE IN ACCORDANCE WITH TERMS OF THE CONTRACT, "TAKING INTO ACCOUNT GENERAL PRINCIPLES OF EQUITY" - REFERENCE BY ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL TO THE UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES AS "A RELIABLE SOURCE OF INTERNATIONAL COMMERCIAL LAW IN INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION" CONTRACT INTERPRETATION - ACCORDING TO COMMON INTENTION OF PARTIES OR, IF A COMMON INTENTION CANNOT BE ESTABLISHED, ACCORDING TO UNDERSTANDING OF REASONABLE PERSONS (ART. 4.1(1) AND (2) UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES; ART. 5:101(1) AND (2) OF PRINCIPLES OF EUROPEAN CONTRACT LAW) CONTRACT PERFORMANCE - PARTIES ENGAGING IN UNCOOPERATIVE ACTS TO THEIR OWN BENEFIT AT THE EXPENSE OF OTHER PARTIES - CONTRARY TO PRINCIPLE OF GOOD FAITH AND FAIR DEALING INHERENT IN INTERNATIONAL CONTRACTS (ART. 1.7 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES) CONTRACT PERFORMANCE - OBLIGATION INVOLVING DUTY OF BEST EFFORTS - MEANING (ART. 5.4(2) [ART. 5.1.4(2) OF THE 2004 EDITION] UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES) FUNDAMENTAL NON-PERFORMANCE - CIRCUMSTANCES RELEVANT FOR DETERMINING WHETHER NON-PERFORMANCE IS FUNDAMENTAL (ART. 7.3.1(2) UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES) TERMINATION OF CONTRACT FOR FUNDAMENTAL NON-PERFORMANCE - RELEASES PARTIES FROM THEIR OBLIGATION TO EFFECT AND TO RECEIVE FURTHER PERFORMANCE (ARTS. 7.3.1 AND 7.3.5 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES) TERMINATION - RESTITUTION OF WHAT PARTIES HAD SUPPLIED UNDER THE CONTRACT - RESTITUTION IMPOSSIBLE - PARTY NO LONGER ENTITLED TO CLAIM RESTITUTION OF WHAT IT HAD SUPPLIED (ART.7.3.6 [ART. 7.3.7 OF THE 2010 EDITION] UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES) RIGHT TO DAMAGES - PARTY ENTITLED TO COMPENSATION FOR LOSS SUFFERED ONLY IN CASE OF BREACH BY OTHER PARTY (ART.7.4.2 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES) | |
|
Arbitral Award ICC International Court of Arbitration 10022 00-10-2000 LONG-TERM CONTRACTS - COOPERATION AGREEMENT - ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL REQUESTED TO TAKE INTO ACCOUNT “RELEVANT TRADE USAGES” (ARTICLE 17 ICC RULES OF ARBITRATION) – REFERENCE INCLUDES BUT IS NOT LIMITED TO THE UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES AND THE PRINCIPLES OF EUROPEAN CONTRACT LAW. | |
|
Arbitral Award ICC International Court of Arbitration, Paris 10504 00-11-2000 SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT - BETWEEN TWO EASTERN EUROPEAN COMPANIES - SOLE ARBITRATOR AUTHORIZED TO ACT "EN ARBITRAGE EQUITABLE" - APPLICATION OF UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES THREAT COMING FROM A THIRD PARTY - RELEVANT IF IT HAS LEFT THE CONTRACTING PARTY "NO REASONABLE ALTERNATIVE"- REFERENCE TO ART. 3.9 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES THREAT COMING FROM A THIRD PARTY - CONSIDERED AS A LEGITIMATE GROUND FOR THE AVOIDANCE OF CONTRACT WHEN THE THIRD PARTY IS ACCESSORY TO THE OTHER CONTRACTING PARTY - REFERENCE TO ARTS. 3.11 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES | |
|
Arbitral Award Arbitration Institute of the Stockholm Chamber of Commerce 00-00-2001 LONG TERM CONTRACTS - CONTRACT ON TECHNOLOGY EXCHANGE AND TECHNICAL COOPERATION - BETWEEN A EUROPEAN COMPANY AND TWO CHINESE COMPANIES - SILENT AS TO APPLICABLE LAW - INTERPRETED BY ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL AS INTENTION OF PARTIES TO EXCLUDE APPLICATION OF ANY DOMESTIC LAW - APPLICATION OF UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES AS "RULES OF LAW CONSIDERED TO BE MOST APPROPRIATE" IN CASE AT HAND (SEE ARTICLE 24(1) STOCKHOLM ARBITRATION RULES)- SUBSIDIARY APPLICATION OF SWEDISH LAW AS NEUTRAL LAW UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES DEFINED AS RULES "WHICH HAVE WIDE RECOGNITION AND SET OUT PRINCIPLES THAT OFFERS A PROTECTION FOR CONTRACTING PARTIES THAT ADEQUATELY REFLECTS THE BASIC PRINCIPLES OF COMMERCIAL RELATIONS IN MOST IF NOT ALL DEVELOPED COUNTRIES" | |
|
Arbitral Award ICC International Court of Arbitration 10422 00-00-2001 LONG-TERM CONTRACTS - DISTRIBUTION AGREEMENT - BETWEEN A EUROPEAN COMPANY AND A LATIN AMERICAN COMPANY - CHOICE OF LAW CLAUSE INEFFECTIVE BUT INDICATING PARTIES' DESIRE FOR A NEUTRAL SOLUTION - APPLICATION BY ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL OF THE LEX MERCATORIA (ARTICLE 17.1 ICC RULES OF ARBITRATION) - REFERENCE TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES - LIMITS CONTRACT FORMATION - ACCEPTANCE CONTAINING MODIFIED TERMS - AMOUNTS TO ACCEPTANCE IF MODIFICATIONS ARE NOT MATERIAL (ARTICLE 2.11 [ART. 2.1.11 OF THE 2004 EDITION] UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES) CONTRACT FORMATION - CONCLUSION OF CONTRACT DEPENDENT ON AGREEMENT ON SPECIFIC MATTERS (ARTICLE 2.13 [ART. 2.1.13 OF THE 2004 EDITION] UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES) CONTRACT INTERPRETATION - TERMS TO BE GIVEN EFFECT (ARTICLE 4.5 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES) TERMINATION OF CONTRACT - FUNDAMENTAL BREACH REQUIRED (ARTICLE 7.3.1(1) UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES) - NOTICE OF TERMINATION WITHOUT FUNDAMENTAL BREACH - TERMINATION NEVERTHELESS EFFECTIVE (ARTICLE 7.3.2 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES) - NOTIFYING PARTY LIABLE FOR DAMAGES DAMAGES - LOSS OF PROFIT - CALCULATION (ARTICLE 7.4.2 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES) DAMAGES - DISCRETIONARY ASSESSMENT BY COURT (ARTICLE 7.4.3(2) | |
|
Arbitral Award ICC International Court of Arbitration 11375 00-03-2002 LONG-TERM CONTRACTS - CONSORTIUM AGREEMENT - BETWEEN WESTERN EUROPEAN COMPANIES AND EAST ASIAN COMPANIES - TO BID FOR A BOT CONCESSION IN AN EAST ASIAN COUNTRY - IMPLICIT OBLIGATION FOR CONSORTIUM MEMBERS TO ACT IN GOOD FAITH AMONG THEMSELVES - REFERENCE TO APPLICABLE DOMESTIC LAW AND TO THE UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES | |
|
Arbitral Award ICC International Court of Arbitration 11926 00-00-2003 INTERNATIONAL CONTRACT SILENT AS TO APPLICABLE LAW – SOLE ARBITRATOR DECIDES TO APPLY TRANSNATIONAL PRINCIPLES AND RULES SUCH AS THE UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES, THE PRINCIPLES OF EUROPEAN CONTRACT LAW OR THE CENTRAL LIST OF PRINCIPLES AND RULES OF THE LEX MERCATORIA – SUCH PRINCIPLES TO BE COMPARED WITH CORRESPONDING PROVISIONS OF ITALIAN LAW AS THE OTHERWISE APPLICABLE LAW IN ORDER TO AVOID TAKING EITHER OF THE PARTIES BY SURPRISE | |
|
Arbitral Award ICC International Court of Arbitration 12123 00-00-2003 ARBITRATION AGREEMENT INDICATING “EUROPEAN LAW” AS THE LAW APPLICABLE TO THE MERITS OF THE DISPUTE – ACCORDING TO ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL “EUROPEAN LAW” MAY BE UNDERSTOOD AS “A SORT OF AMALGAM OF FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES TO WHICH THE MAJOR EUROPEAN SYSTEMS ASPIRE, E.G. THOSE WHICH ARE AT THE BASIS OF PROJECTS FOR A EUROPEAN CIVIL CODE, THOSE OF UNIDROIT, THOSE TO BE FOUND IN INTERNATIONAL CONVENTIONS OF UNIFORM LAW, THOSE OF THE LEX MERCATORIA, AND SO FORTH” | |
|
Arbitral Award ICC International Court of Arbitration 12111 06-01-2003 SALES CONTRACT - BETWEEN A RUMANIAN COMPANY AND AN ENGLISH COMPANY - REFERRING TO "INTERNATIONAL LAW" AS THE LAW GOVERNING THE CONTRACT - TO BE UNDERSTOOD AS REFERENCE TO THE GENERAL PRINCIPLES OF LAW AND THE LEX MERCATORIA - APPLICATION OF THE UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES (PARAGRAPH 3 OF THE PREAMBLE OF THE UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES) PRINCIPLES OF EUROPEAN CONTRACT LAW - ACADEMIC EXERCISE PRELIMINARY TO A EUROPEAN CIVIL CODE - AS SUCH NOT YET APPLICABLE TO INTERNATIONAL COMMERCIAL CONTRACTS | |
|
Arbitral Award Ad hoc Arbitration (Place unknown) 04-03-2004 LONG-TERM CONTRACTS - DISTRIBUTION AGREEMENT - BETWEEN A WESTERN EUROPEAN MANUFACTURER AND A CENTRAL EUROPEAN DISTRIBUTOR - FRENCH LAW GOVERNING THE CONTRACT – REFERENCE TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES IN SUPPORT OF SOLUTIONS ADOPTED UNDER FRENCH LAW GOOD FAITH PRINCIPLE ACCORDING TO ARTICLES 1134(3) AND 1135 OF FRENCH CIVIL CODE RELEVANT ALSO IN INTERNATIONAL TRADE – ARTICLE 1.7(1) OF UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES GOOD FAITH AND CONTRACT NEGOTIATION - PARTIES ENTERING INTO NEGOTIATIONS WITH A VIEW TO SETTLE DISPUTE BOUND TO ACT IN GOOD FAITH IN SEARCH OF AMICABLE SOLUTION – DUTY TO NEGOTIATE IN GOOD FAITH NOT BREACHED BY MERELY REFUSING TERMS OF SETTLEMENT PROPOSED BY OTHER PARTY GOOD FAITH AND CONTRACT PERFORMANCE – DISTRIBUTORSHIP AGREEMENT PROVIDING FOR YEARLY MINIMUM QUANTITIES OF GOODS TO BE PURCHASED BY DISTRIBUTOR – DISTRIBUTOR'S FAILURE TO MEET YEARLY QUOTA – MANUFACTURER’S CLAIM FOR BREACH OF CONTRACT CONTRARY TO GOOD FAITH WHERE DISTRIBUTOR PURCHASED A SUBSTANTIAL QUANTITY OF GOODS IN EXCESS OF YEARLY QUOTA AT THE END OF PREVIOUS YEAR AND ITS FAILURE TO PURCHASE GOODS THE FOLLOWING YEAR WAS DUE TO DISPUTE WITH MANUFACTURER CONTRACT PROHIBITING DISTRIBUTOR FROM SELLING SIMILAR PRODUCTS FROM OTHER SUPPLIERS – DISTRIBUTOR NEVERTHELESS SELLING COMPETING GOODS – MANUFACTURER AWARE OF IT BUT NOT OBJECTING PREVENTED FROM INVOKING YEARS LATER DISTRIBUTOR'S BREACH OF CONTRACT – PROHIBITION OF INCONSISTENT BEHAVIOUR A GENERALLY ACCEPTED PRINCIPLE IN INTERNATIONAL TRADE - ARTICLE 1.8 OF UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES 2004 | |
|
Arbitral Award Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) 06-07-2004 DISPUTE BETWEEN THE FOOTBALL ASSOCIATION OF WALES AND THE UNION OF EUROPEAN FOOTBALL ASSOCIATIONS (UEFA) - CONTRA PROFERENTEM RULE - GENERAL PRINCIPLE OF LEX SPORTIVA - REFERENCE TO ARTICLE 4.6 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES | |
|
Arbitral Award Netherlands Arbitration Institute 10-02-2005 SALES CONTRACT - BETWEEN DUTCH SELLER AND ITALIAN BUYER - GOVERNED BY CISG – REFERENCE TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES DEFINED AS "PRINCIPLES IN THE SENSE OF ARTICLE 7(2) CISG" AND TO PRINCIPLES OF EUROPEAN CONTRACT LAW APPLICABILITY OF SELLER’S STANDARD TERMS – QUESTION AS TO WHETHER BEFORE OR AT TIME OF CONCLUSION OF CONTRACT BUYER MUST BE GIVEN OPPORTUNITY TO KNOW CONTENT OF SELLER'S STANDARD TERMS NOT EXPRESSLY REGULATED IN CISG - QUESTION LEFT OPEN IN UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES (CF. ARTICLE 2.19 [ART. 2.1.19 OF THE 2004 EDITION] AND COMMENTS AND TO ARTICLE 2.20 [ART. 2.1.20 OF THE 2004 EDITION] – AFFIRMATIVE SOLUTION ADOPTED BY PRINCIPLES OF EUROPEAN CONTRACT LAW (ARTICLE 2:104) | |
|
Arbitral Award Internationales Schiedsgericht der Wirtschaftskammer Österreich 11-05-2006 SALES CONTRACT - BETWEEN AN AUSTRIAN COMPANY AND A EASTERN EUROPEAN COMPANY - PARTIES AGREED ON APPLICATION OF AUSTRIAN LAW INCLUDING CISG AS THE LAW APPLICABLE TO THE SUBSTANCE OF THE DISPUTE ASSIGNMENT OF CLAIM TO PAYMENT OF PRICE TO FINANCIAL INSTITUTION – OBLIGOR ENTITLED TO RIGHT OF SET-OFF VIS-À-VIS ASSIGNOR UNTIL INFORMED OF ASSIGNMENT (SEE § 1396 OF THE AUSTRIAN CIVIL CODE AS WELL AS ARTICLES 9.1.10(1) AND 9.1.13(2) OF THE UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES 2004 AND ARTICLES 11:303(4) AND 10:107(1) OF THE PRINCIPLES OF EUROPEAN CONTRACT LAW) THIRD PARTY’S ACCEPTANCE TO BE SUBSTITUTED AS NEW OBLIGOR VIS-À-VIS OBLIGEE – OLD OBLIGOR REMAINS JOINTLY AND SEVERALLY LIABLE UNLESS EXPRESSLY DISCHARGED BY OBLIGEE (SEE § 1406 OF THE AUSTRIAN CIVIL CODE AS WELL AS ARTS. 9.2.1 AND 9.2.5(3) OF THE UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES 2004) RIGHT TO INTEREST (ART. 78 CISG) – APPLICATION OF STATUTORY RATE CREDITOR'S DOMESTIC LAW – RATE OF 9,47% P.A. AS PROVIDED BY § 1333(2) OF THE AUSTRIAN CIVIL CODE AS AMENDED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE EC DIRECTIVE 2000/35 ON COMBATING LATE PAYMENT IN COMMERCIAL TRANSACTIONS | |
|
Arbitral Award ICC International Court of Arbitration 09-10-2006 SALES CONTRACT - BETWEEN TWO EUROPEAN COMPANIES - SWISS LAW APPLICABLE - REFERENCE TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES TO CONFIRM SOLUTION ADOPTED UNDER SWISS LAW SELLER'S FAILURE TO PERFORM DUE TO BUYER'S BEHAVIOUR - BUYER MAY NOT RELY ON SELLER'S NON-PERFORMANCE (ARTICLE 7.1.2 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES) SELLER'S IMPOSSIBILITY TO PERFORM DUE TO BUYER'S BEHAVIOUR - CONTRACT NOT NULLIFIED (COMMENT 3(A) TO ARTICLE 7.2.2 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES | |
|
Arbitral Award Internationales Schiedsgericht der Wirtschaftskammer Österreich 19-03-2007 DISPUTE BETWEEN TWO EUROPEAN COMPANIES ARBITRATION - POWERS OF ARBITRATORS DERIVING FROM CONTRACT BETWEEN PARTIES AND ARBITRATORS - REFERENCE TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES IN SUPPORT OF THE SOLUTION ADOPTED UNDER APPLICABLE DOMESTIC LAW (LAW OF A EASTERN EUROPEAN COUNTRY) PERFORMANCE OF CONTRACT - PARTIES' DUTY TO ACT IN GOOD FAITH (ARTICLE 1.7(1) UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES) | |
|
Arbitral Award ICC International Court of Arbitration 14581 00-06-2007 STATE CONTRACTS - SUPPLY CONTRACT FOR LEASING EQUIPMENT AND LICENSING TECHNOLOGY - BETWEEN TWO MINISTRIES OF STATE X AND A COMPANY OF STATE Y - UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES AS AN "EXPRESSION OF INTERNATIONALLY RECOGNISED PRINCIPLES" ARBITRATION CLAUSE PROVIDING THAT DISPUTES TO BE DECIDED BY "THE INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION COURT IN SWITZERLAND" AND "IN ACCORDANCE WITH INTERNATIONAL LAW" - INTERPRETATION OF AMBIGUOUS CLAUSE ACCORDING TO SWISS LAW AS LAW OF SEAT OF ARBITRATION AND ACCORDING TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES INVOKED BY PARTES AS "EXPRESSION OF INTERNATIONALLY RECOGNISED PRINCIPLES", TOGETHER WITH EUROPEAN PRINCIPLES OF CONTRACT LAW AND CISG - REFERENCE TO ARTICLE 4.2 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES IN SUPPORT OF SIMILAR PROVISION IN SWISS LAW | |
|
Arbitral Award Foreign Trade Court of Arbitration attached to the Serbian Chamber of Commerce 23-01-2008 SALES CONTRACT - BETWEEN A SERBIAN SELLER AND AN ITALIAN BUYER – PARTIES' CHOICE OF SERBIAN LAW AS THE LAW APPLICABLE TO THE SUBSTANCE OF THE DISPUTE - CISG APPLICABLE ACCORDING TO ITS ART. 1(1)(A) – ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL DECIDES ALSO TO APPLY BOTH THE PRINCIPLES OF EUROPEAN CONTRACT LAW AND THE UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES AS EXPRESSION OF THE TRADE USAGES IT HAD TO TAKE INTO ACCOUNT ACCORDING TO THE RELEVANT ARBITRATION RULES SELLER’S FAILURE TO DELIVER TOGETHER WITH THE GOODS THE CERTIFICATE OF THEIR ORIGIN AS REQUESTED UNDER THE CONTRACT – AMOUNTS TO A NON-PERFORMANCE (ARTICLES 35(1), 36(1) AND 45(1)(B) CISG)) BUYER’S RIGHT TO DAMAGES FOR THE LOSSES CAUSED BY SELLER’S NON-PERFORMANCE – REFERENCE TO ARTICLE 74 CISG AND TO ARTICLES 9:501 AND 9:502 OF THE PRINCIPLES OF EUROPEAN CONTRACT LAW AND TO ARTICLES 7.4.1 AND 7.4.4 OF THE UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES. RIGHT TO INTEREST – APPLICABLE RATE – REFERENCE TO METHOD OF CALCULATION INDICATED IN ARTICLES 9:508 OF THE PRINCIPLES OF EUROPEAN CONTRACT LAW AND 7.4.9 OF THE UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES | |
|
Arbitral Award Permanent Court of Arbitration 00-00-2009 LONG-TERM CONTRACTS - LICENSING AGREEMENT - BETWEEN EUROPEAN COMPANY AND INTERNATIONAL GOVERNMENTAL ORGANISATION – PARTIES’ EXPRESS CHOICE OF UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES AS THE LAW GOVERNING THE CONTRACT FORMATION OF CONTRACTS – REFERENCE TO ARTICLES 2.1.1., 2.1.2., 2.1.3., AND 2.1.6 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES | |
|
Arbitral Award Ad hoc Arbitration, The Hague 30-03-2010 STATE CONTRACTS - LONG-TERM CONTRACTS - EXPLORATION AND EXPLOITATION AGREEMENT - BETWEEN TWO UNITED STATES COMPANIES AND THE ECUADORIAN GOVERNMENT – REFERENCE TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES TO INTERPRET APPLICABLE LAW (INTERNATIONAL LAW AS WELL AS ECUADORIAN LAW) LOSS OF A CHANCE – CRITERION FOR DETERMINING AMOUNT OF DAMAGES IN CASE OF BREACH OF THE BIT DUE TO DENIAL OF JUSTICE – REFERENCE BY ONE OF THE PARTIES TO ARTICLE 7.4.3(2) OF UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES – ACCORDING TO ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL ONLY ADMISSIBLE WHERE AMOUNT OF LOSS NOT DETERMINABLE – REFERENCE TO COMMENT 2 TO ARTICLE 7.4.3 OF UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES FORCE MAJEURE – HARDSHIP – DISTRIBUTION BETWEEN THE PARTIES IN A JUST AND EQUITABLE MANNER OF THE LOSSES AND GAINS RESULTING FROM UNFORESEEABLE EVENT – REFERENCE TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES (COMMENT ARTICLES 7.1.7 AND TO ARTICLES 6.2.2 – 6.2.3(2)) AND TO PRINCIPLES OF EUROPEAN CONTRACT LAW (ARTICLE 6:111(3)(B)) AS A MEANS TO INTERPRET ECUADORIAN LAW (ARTICLE 1563 ECUADORIAN CIVIL CODE) | |
|
Arbitral Award ICC International Court of Arbitration ICC-FA-2020-003 00-00-2011 CONTRACT BETWEEN TWO EUROPEAN PARTIES - REFERENCE TO APPLICABLE ROMANIAN LAW AND TO THE UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES INCONSISTENT BEHAVIOR - PARTY PRECLUDED TO INSIST ON A CONTRACTUAL TERM SUPERSEDED BY A SUBSEQUENT AGREEMENT REACHED BY THE PARTIES PROHIBITION OF INCONSISTENT BEHAVIOR - ESTOPPEL - GENERAL PRINCIPLE OF GOOD FAITH - REFERENCE TO ARTICLES 1.7 AND 1.8 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES WHICH ACCORDING TO ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL "RESTATE THESE FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES" | |
|
Arbitral Award ICC International Court of Arbitration, Paris 15949 00-05-2012 LONG-TERM CONTRACTS - SERVICE CONTRACT - BETWEEN A NORTH AFRICAN COMPANY AND EASTERN EUROPEAN COMPANY - UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES AS MEANS TO INTERPRET AND SUPPLEMENT APPLICABLE DOMESTIC LAW (FRENCH LAW) HOTEL MANAGEMENT CONTRACT - TERRORIST ATTACKS IN NEW YORK, DJERBA AND MARRAKECH AMOUNT TO FORCE MAJEURE EVENTS - RESPONDENT ALLOWED TO SUSPEND PAYMENT OF MINIMAL GUARANTEE PROVIDED IN THE CONTRACT - REFERENCE TO ART. 7.1.7 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES EFFECTS OF FORCE MAJEURE - WHEN THE IMPEDIMENT IS ONLY TEMPORARY, THE EXCUSE FOR NON_PERFORMANCE HAS EFFECT ONLY FOR A REASONABLE PERIOD OF TIME HAVING REGARD TO CONSEQUENCES OF THE IMPEDIMENT ON CONTRACT PERFORMANCE - REFERENCE TO ART. 7.1.7 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES AND ITS COMMENT | |
|
Arbitral Award ICC International Court of Arbitration ICC-FA-2020-005 00-00-2013 CONTRACT BETWEEN NORTH AFRICAN AND NORTH AMERICAN PARTIES AND EUROPEAN PARTY - UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES AS MEANS TO INTERPRET AND SUPPLEMENT APPLICABLE DOMESTIC LAW (MOROCCAN LAW) PRINCIPLE OF GOOD FAITH IN CONTRACT PERFORMANCE - FORMULATION OF ART. 231 MOROCCAN CODE OF OBLIGATIONS BROADER THAN ART. 1134 FRENCH CIVIL CODE - REFERENCE TO ARTS. 1.7 AND 5.1.3 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES TO CONFIRM THE SOLUTION ADOPTED UNDER MOROCCAN LAW | |
|
Australia Federal Court of Australia 12-02-2003 LONG-TERM CONTRACTS - ADMINISTRATIVE CONTRACTS - SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT - BETWEEN THE COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA AND TWO AUSTRALIAN SOFTWARE COMPANIES - GOVERNED BY AUSTRALIAN LAW - REFERENCE TO THE UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES AS A MEANS TO INTERPRET AND SUPPLEMENT APPLICABLE DOMESTIC LAW NO ORAL MODIFICATION CLAUSE - EFFECTIVENESS - EXCEPTION IN CASE OF ESTOPPEL (REFERENCE BY COURT TO ART. 2.18 [ART. 2.1.18 OF THE 2004 EDITION] OF THE UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES) CONTRACT FOR DEVELOPMENT OF SOFTWARE - CONTRACT PROVIDES FOR PAYMENTS TO BE MADE IN AGREED INSTALMENTS THROUGHOUT THE DURATION OF THE WORK - INSTALMENTS NOT CONDITIONAL ON COMPLETION OF WORK (REFERENCE BY COURT TO ART. 6.1.4, COMMENT 2, OF UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES) DUTY OF GOOD FAITH AND FAIR DEALING - IMPLIED TERM OF ALL CONTRACTS -ENTIRE AGREEMENT CLAUSE NOT SUFFICIENT TO PRECLUDE SUCH IMPLICATION (REFERENCE BY COURT TO ART. 1.7 OF THE UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES; ART. 1.201 OF THE PRINCIPLES OF EUROPEAN CONTRACT LAW) | |
|
China Henan Luoyang Jianxi District People’s Court 00-00-2002 LONG-TERM CONTRACTS - LEASE CONTRACT - BETWEEN TWO CHINESE COMPANIES - GOVERNED BY CHINESE LAW "COMMENTS" BY CHINESE JUDGES ON THEIR DECISIONS - NOT LEGALLY BINDING - DECISION AWARDING DAMAGES FOR FUNDAMENTAL BREACH - REFERENCE TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES, CISG AND PRINCIPLES OF EUROPEAN CONTRACT LAW IN A "COMMENT" WRITTEN BY MEMBERS OF THE COURT | |
|
Georgia Supreme Court 29-03-2019 SHARE PURCHASE AGREEMENT - BETWEEN A GEORGIAN COMPANY AND A GEORGIAN INDIVIDUAL - REFERENCE TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES IN SUPPORT OF APPLICABLE DOMESTIC LAW (GEORGIAN LAW) PRINCIPLE OF GOOD FAITH – ACCORDING TO ART. 8 OF THE CIVIL CODE OF GEORGIA PARTIES TO A LEGAL RELATIONSHIP MUST EXERCISE THEIR RIGHTS AND DUTIES IN GOOD FAITH – REFERENCE TO ART. 1.7 OF UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES AND TO ART. 1:201 OF THE PRINCIPLES OF EUROPEAN CONTRACT LAW TO CONFIRM THAT SOLUTION ADOPTED BY APPLICABLE DOMESTIC LAW IS IN CONFORMITY WITH INTERNATIONAL STANDARDS | |
|
Georgia Supreme Court 04-12-2019 LOAN CONTRACT - BETWEEN GEORGIAN BANK AND SEVERAL GEORGIAN COMPANIES - REFERENCE TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES IN SUPPORT OF APPLICABLE DOMESTIC LAW (GEORGIAN LAW) JOINT AND SEVERAL OBLIGATIONS - REFERENCE TO ART. 11.1.1 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES TO INTERPRET ART. 463 OF CIVIL CODE OF GEORGIA PRINCIPLE OF GOOD FAITH – ACCORDING TO ART. 8 OF THE CIVIL CODE OF GEORGIA PARTIES TO A LEGAL RELATIONSHIP MUST EXERCISE THEIR RIGHTS AND DUTIES IN GOOD FAITH – REFERENCE TO ART. 1.7 OF UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES AND TO ART. 1:201 OF THE PRINCIPLES OF EUROPEAN CONTRACT LAW TO CONFIRM THAT SOLUTION ADOPTED BY APPLICABLE DOMESTIC LAW IN IN CONFORMITY WITH INTERNATIONAL STANDARDS | |
|
International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) 30-07-2010 STATE CONTRACTS - LONG-TERM CONTRACTS - CONCESSION CONTRACT - BETWEEN FRENCH AND SPANISH INVESTORS AND THE ARGENTINIAN GOVERNMENT - DUE TO ARGENTINA'S FINANCIAL CRISIS ARGENTINIAN AUTHORITIES ADOPTED A SERIES OF MEASURES NEGATIVELY AFFECTING PROFITABILITY OF FOREIGN INVESTORS' INVESTMENT - ALLEGED VIOLATION BY ARGENTINA OF BILATERAL INVESTMENT TREATIES - REFERENCE TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES TO INTERPRET NATIONAL LAW (ARGENTINIAN LAW) RESPONDENT INVOKING FORCE MAJEURE AS EXCUSE FOR VIOLATION OF BIT - OBJECTION REJECTED ON THE GROUND THAT RESPONDENT WAS PARTLY RESPONSIBLE FOR ITS FINANCIAL CRISIS REQUEST FOR RE-NEGOTIATION OF TERMS OF CONCESSION - IN ACCORDANCE WITH INTERNATIONAL STANDARDS IMPOSING IN LONG-TERM CONTRACTS IN THE EVENT OF HARDSHIP AN OBLIGATION TO NEGOTIATE CONTRACT ADAPTATION - REFERENCE TO ARTICLE 6:111 PRINCIPLES OF EUROPEAN CONTRACT LAW AND ARTICLES 6.2.2 AND 6.2.3 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES | |
|
Italy Tribunale Padova - Sez. Este 10-01-2006 SALES CONTRACT - BETWEEN AN ITALIAN MANUFACTURER AND AN ENGLISH DISTRIBUTOR JURISDICTION - EUROPEAN COUNCIL REGULATION NO. 44/2001 ON JURISDICTION AND RECOGNITION AND ENFORCEMENT OF JUDGEMENTS IN CIVIL AND COMMERCIAL MATTERS - JURISDICTION OF COURT FOR PLACE OF PERFORMANCE NEED FOR AN AUTONOMOUS INTERPRETATION OF REGULATION - RECOURSE TO CISG IN VIEW OF ITS LARGE CONSENSUS WORLDWIDE AND ITS IMPORTANCE AS MODEL FOR OTHER INSTRUMENTS ADOPTED AT EUROPEAN LEVEL NOTION OF "CONTRACT OF SALE" UNDER THE REGULATION (ART. 1(1)(B)) - DEFINED ACCORDING TO CISG NOTION OF "PLACE OF DELIVERY" UNDER THE REGULATION (ART. 5 (1)(B)) - RECOURSE TO ART. 31(A) CISG - SOLUTION CONFIRMED BY OTHER "AUTONOMOUS" INTERNATIONAL INSTRUMENTS SUCH AS UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES OF INTERNATIONAL COMMERCIAL CONTRACTS (SEE ART. 6.1.6(1)(B)) AND PRINCIPLES OF EUROPEAN CONTRACT LAW (SEE ART. 7:101(1)(B)) | |
|
Italy Corte di Cassazione Sez. Unite 05-10-2009 SALES CONTRACT - BETWEN AN ITALIAN SELLER AND A GERMAN BUYER - REFERENCE TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES AS A MEANS OF INTERPRETING INTERNATIONAL UNIFORM LAW INSTRUMENTS (EUROPEAN COUNCIL REGULATION NO. 44/2001 ON JURISDICTION AND RECOGNITION AND ENFORCEMENT OF JUDGEMENTS IN CIVIL AND COMMERCIAL MATTERS) ARTICLE 5 (1)(b) OF THE REGULATION ESTABLISHING JURISDICTION OF COURTS FOR "PLACE OF DELIVERY OF THE GOODS" - TO BE UNDERSTOOD AS PLACE OF ULTIMATE DESTINATION AND NOT AS PLACE WHERE GOODS ARE HANDED OVER TO THE FIRST CARRIER AS PROVIDED IN CISG AND THE UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES | |
|
Italy T.A.R. Molise 17-05-2017 ADMINISTRATIVE CONTRACTS - LONG-TERM CONTRACTS - CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT - BETWEEN AN ITALIAN COMPANY AND AN ITALIAN LOCAL AUTHORITY - USE OF UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES AS A MEANS OF INTERPRETING APPLICABLE DOMESTIC LAW (ITALIAN LAW) DUTY TO RENEGOTIATE IN GOOD FAITH - APPLICABLE ALSO TO PUBLIC AUTHORITY - WHENEVER A CHANGE IN THE FACTUAL CIRCUMSTANCES RENDERS THE CONTRACT UNBALANCED - REFERENCE TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES TOGETHER WITH PRINCIPLES OF EUROPEAN CONTRACT LAW AND GANDOLFI CONTRACT CODE | |
|
Italy Tribunale di Bergamo 15-09-2017 SERVICE CONTRACT FOR COLLECTION OF LOCAL TAXES - BETWEEN AN ITALIAN MUNICIPALITY AND AN ITALIAN COMPANY - REFERENCE TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES AND PRINCIPLES OF EUROPEAN CONTRACT LAW TO INTERPRET AND SUPPLEMENT APPLICABLE DOMESTIC LA (ITALIAN LAW) CHANGE OF COLLECTING METHOD INTRODUCED BY LAW - COLLECTING METHOD PREVIOUSLY USED BY COMPANY NO LONGER APPROPRIATE - REQUEST BY COMPANY TO RENEGOTIATE ORIGINAL CONTRACT - UPON REFUSAL BY MUNICIPALITY, COMPANY CLAIMS BREACH BY MUNICIPALITY OF ITS OBLIGATION TO RENEGOTIATE CONTRACT AS CONTAINED IN CONTRACT - CLAIM DISMISSED BECAUSE COURT HELD THAT IN CASE AT HAND MUNICIPALITY HAD FULFILLED ITS DUTY TO RENEGOTIATE CONTRACT - REFERENCE TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES AND PRINCIPLES OF EUROPEAN CONTRACT LAW | |
|
Italy T.A.R. Lombardia 23-07-2019 ADMINISTRATIVE CONTRACTS - LONG-TERM CONTRACTS - CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT - BETWEEN AN ITALIAN COMPANY AND AN ITALIAN LOCAL AUTHORITY - USE OF UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES AS A MEANS OF INTERPRETING APPLICABLE DOMESTIC LAW (ITALIAN LAW) DUTY TO RENEGOTIATE IN GOOD FAITH - APPLICABLE ALSO TO PUBLIC AUTHORITY - REFERENCE TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES TOGETHER WITH PRINCIPLES OF EUROPEAN CONTRACT LAW | |
|
Lithuania Supreme Court of Lithuania 06-11-2006 SALES CONTRACT - BETWEEN TWO LITHUANIAN PARTIES - GOVERNED BY LITHUANIAN LAW - REFERENCE TO THE UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES AND THE PRINCIPLES OF EUROPEAN CONTRACT LAW TO INTERPRET APPLICABLE DOMESTIC LAW (LITHUANIAN LAW) PRELIMINARY CONTRACT - REFUSAL BY ONE OF THE PARTIES TO EXECUTE THE FINAL CONTRACT - PARTY LIABLE FOR DAMAGES COVERING NEGOTIATION EXPENSES AND THE LOST OPPORTUNITY (ARTICLE 6.165 PARA.4 OF THE LITHUANIAN CIVIL CODE; REFERENCE TO COMMENT 2 TO ARTICLE 2.13 (NOW ARTICLE 2.1.13) ("CONCLUSION OF CONTRACT DEPENDENT ON AGREEMENT ON SPECIFIC MATTERS OR IN A SPECIFIC FORM") AND TO COMMENTS TO ARTICLE 2.15 (NOW ARTICLE 2.1.15) ("NEGOTIATIONS IN BAD FAITH") OF THE UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES, AS WELL AS TO ARTICLE 3.301(2) AND (3) OF THE EUROPEAN PRINCIPLES). | |
|
Netherlands Gerechtshof's Hertogenbosch 16-10-2002 SALES CONTRACT - BETWEEN A FRENCH SELLER AND A DUTCH BUYER - GOVERNED BY CISG INTERPRETATION OF CISG – REGARD TO INTERNATIONAL ORIGIN OF THE CONVENTION AND NEED OF ITS UNIFORM APPLICATION (ARTICLE 7 CISG) – REGARD TO COMMON PRINCIPLES OF CONTRACTING STATES – REFERENCE TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES AND TO PRINCIPLES OF EUROPEAN CONTRACT LAW APPLICABILITY OF SELLER’S STANDARD TERMS – TRADE USAGE (ARTICLE 9(2) CISG)) INCORPORATION OF SELLER’S STANDARD TERMS INTO CONTRACT - APPLICATION OF GENERAL RULES ON OFFER AND ACCEPTANCE (ARTICLE 18 CISG) - REFERENCE TO STANDARD TERMS IN OFFER NECESSARY QUESTION AS TO WHETHER BEFORE OR AT TIME OF CONCLUSION OF CONTRACT BUYER MUST BE GIVEN OPPORTUNITY TO KNOW CONTENT OF SELLER'S STANDARD TERMS NOT EXPRESSLY REGULATED IN CISG - QUESTION LEFT OPEN IN UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES (CF. COMMENTS TO ARTICLE 2.20[ART. 2.1.20 OF THE 2004 EDITION]) – AFFIRMATIVE SOLUTION ADOPTED BY PRINCIPLES OF EUROPEAN CONTRACT LAW (ARTICLE 2.104) – SAME SOLUTION TO BE ADOPTED UNDER CISG AS IT PROMOTES GOOD FAITH IN INTERNATIONAL TRADE AND REFLECTS DOMESTIC LAW OF BOTH SELLER’S AND BUYER’S COUNTRIES (FRANCE AND THE NETHERLANDS) | |
|
Netherlands Hoge Raad 21-09-2007 SALES CONTRACT - BETWEEN TWO DUTCH PARTIES - REFERENCE TO PRINCIPLES OF EUROPEAN CONTRACT LAW AND TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES TO INTERPRET APPLICABLE DOMESTIC LAW (DUTCH LAW) STANDARD TERMS - EXEMPTION CLAUSE - WHETHER OR NOT BINDING ON ADHERING PARTY (ARTICLE 6:233(B) DUTCH CIVIL CODE; ARTICLE 2:204(2) OF THE PRINCIPLES OF EUROPEAN CONTRACT LAW AND ARTICLE 2.1.20(1) OF THE UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES) | |
|
Netherlands Hoge Raad 11-07-2008 SALES CONTRACT - BETWEEN TWO DUTCH COMPANIES - REFERENCE TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES IN SUPPORT OF SOLUTION ADOPTED UNDER THE APPLICABLE DOMESTIC LAW (DUTCH LAW) ADMISSIBILITY OF EXEMPTION CLAUSES - REFERENCE TO ARTICLE 7.1.6 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES AND COMMENTS THERETO AS WELL AS TO ARTICLE 8:109 PRINCIPLES OF EUROPEAN CONTRACT LAW | |
|
Netherlands Hoge Raad 08-07-2011 SALES CONTRACT - BETWEEN TWO DUTCH COMPANIES - REFERENCE TO THE UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES AS A MEANS OF INTERPRETING THE APPLICABLE DOMESTIC LAW (DUTCH LAW) TERMINATION OF CONTRACT BY MERE NOTICE - TERMINATION NOT PRECLUSIVE OF RIGHT TO DAMAGES - REFERENCE TO ARTICLES 45, 61 AND 49, 64 CISG, ARTICLES 8:102 AND 9:303 OF THE PRINCIPLES OF EUROPEAN CONTRACT LAW (PECL), ARTICLES III-3:102 AND III-3:507 OF THE DRAFT COMMON FRAME OF REFERENCE (DCFR) AND TO ARTICLES 7.4.1 AND 7.3.2 OF THE UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES | |
|
Poland Supreme Court of Poland 03-10-2007 ASSIGNMENT CONTRACT - GOVERNED BY POLISH LAW - REFERENCE TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES IN SUPPORT OF SOLUTION PROVIDED BY 1988 OTTAWA CONVENTION ON INTERNATIONAL FACTORING AS WELL AS BY PRINCIPLES OF EUROPEAN CONTRACT LAW | |
|
Portugal Tribunal da Relação de Lisboa (Court of Appeal of Lisbon) 24-03-2022 FINANCIAL INVESTMENT AGREEMENT - BETWEEN A GERMAN BANK AND A SOUTH EUROPEAN FINANCIAL INVESTMENT COMPANY - REFERENCE BY THE ONE OF THE PARTIES TO PECL AND TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES IN ORDER TO QUALIFY THE TYPE OF CONTRACT - COURT PREFERRING TO RECOURSE TO NATIONAL LAW INSTEAD OF SOFT LAW INSTRUMENTS | |
|
Romania Bucharest Court of Appeal 24-10-2014 SALES CONTRACT - BETWEEN AN ENGLISH SELLER AND A ROMANIAN BUYER – SELLLER’S STANDARD TERMS CONTAINING AN ARBITRATION CLAUSE IN FAVOR OF AN ARBITRATION SEATED IN ENGLAND – REFERENCE TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES TO INTERPRET ART. 23 OF EUROPEAN COUNCIL REGULATION NO. 44/2001 ON JURISDICTION AND RECOGNITION AND ENFORCEMENT OF JUDGEMENTS IN CIVIL AND COMMERCIAL MATTERS EFFECTIVENESS OF ARBITRATION CLAUSE CONTAINED IN STANDARD TERMS UNILATERALLY PREPARED BY SELLER AND SENT TO BUYER BY E-MAIL – RECEIPT PRINCIPLE – REFERENCE TO ART. 1.10 OF UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES EFFECTIVENESS OF ARBITRATION CLAUSE CONTAINED IN STANDARD TERMS UNILATERALLY PREPARED BY SELLER AND SENT TO BUYER BY E-MAIL – REFERENCE TO ARTS. 2.1.19 AND 2.1.20 OF UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES IN ORDER TO AFFIRM THE VALIDITY AND WIDE DIFFUSION IN INTERNATIONAL COMMERCIAL PRACTICE OF THIS FORM OF CONTRACT CONCLUSION - BURDEN OF PROOF ON THE PARTY WHO PROPOSES AN INTERPRETATION DIFFERENT FROM THAT PROVIDED BY THE UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES | |
|
Russian Federation Arbitrazh Court of Saint Petersburg and Leningrad area 29-04-2011 SALES CONTRACT - BETWEEN TWO RUSSIAN COMPANIES - REFERENCE TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES AND OTHER INTERNATIONAL AND FOREIGN LEGAL SOURCES TO SUPPLEMENT APPLICABLE DOMESTIC LAW (RUSSIAN LAW) IMPUTATION OF PAYMENTS - REFERENCE, AMONG OTHERS, TO ARTICLES 6.12 (1) OF UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES AND 7:109 (4)OF PRINCIPLES OF EUROPEAN CONTRACT LAW | |
|
Spain Tribunal Supremo (Sala de lo Civil) 04-07-2006 LONG-TERM CONTRACTS - AGENCY CONTRACT - BETWEEN A GERMAN SHIPPING COMPANY AND A SPANISH COMPANY UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES AND PRINCIPLES OF EUROPEAN CONTRACT LAW AS MEANS OF INTERPRETING DOMESTIC LAW (GERMAN LAW) GOOD FAITH - PARAGRAPH 242 OF THE GERMAN CIVIL CODE DIFFERENT FROM ART. 1258 OF THE SPANISH CIVIL CODE - CORRESPONDING IN SUBSTANCE TO ART. 1.7 OF THE UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES AND ART. 1:201 OF THE PRINCIPLES OF EUROPEAN CONTRACT LAW | |
|
Spain Tribunal Supremo (Sala de lo Civil) 23-07-2007 ADMINISTRATIVE CONTRACTS - SALES CONTRACT - BETWEEN A SPANISH INDIVIDUAL AND A SPANISH MUNICIPALITY UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES AND PRINCIPLES OF EUROPEAN CONTRACT LAW AS MEANS OF INTERPRETING DOMESTIC LAW (SPANISH LAW) TERMINATION FOR BREACH OF CONTRACT - ADMISSIBLE WHEN DEFAULTING PARTY'S NON-PERFORMANCE SUBSTANTIALLY DEPRIVES AGGRIEVED PARTY OF WHAT IT WAS ENTITLED TO EXPECT UNDER THE CONTRACT (ART. 7.3.1(2)(A) UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES) NON-PERFORMANCE EXCUSED - CONDITIONS (ART. 8:108 PRINCIPLES OF EUROPEAN CONTRACT LAW) | |
|
Spain Audiencia Provincial de Lleida (Cataluna) 13-09-2007 SALES CONTRACT - BETWEEN TWO SPANISH INDIVIDUALS - UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES AND PRINCIPLES OF EUROPEAN CONTRACT LAW AS MEANS OF INTERPRETING DOMESTIC LAW (SPANISH LAW) IMPOSSIBILITY OF PERFORMANCE - EFFECTS OF ORIGINAL IMPOSSIBILITY THE SAME AS THOSE OF SUPERVENING IMPOSSIBILITY (ART. 3.3 (1) UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES; ART. 4:102 PRINCIPLES OF EUROPEAN CONTRACT LAW) | |
|
Spain Tribunal Supremo (sala de lo Civil, Sección 1ª) 03-12-2008 LONG-TERM CONTRACTS - SUPPLY CONTRACT - BETWEEN TWO SPANISH COMPANIES - GOVERNED BY SPANISH LAW TERMINATION OF CONTRACT FOR FUNDAMENTAL BREACH - NOTION OF "FUNDAMENTAL BREACH" - REFERENCE TO ARTICLE 7.3.1 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES, ARTICLES 8:101 AND 8:103 PRINCIPLES OF EUROPEAN CONTRACT LAW AND ART. 49(1) CISG BUYER'S FAILURE TO PAY THE PRICE - AMOUNTS TO FUNDAMENTAL BREACH - SELLER ENTITLED TO TERMINATION | |
|
Spain Audiencia Provincial de Valencia (Sección 7ª) 06-03-2009 SALES CONTRACT - BETWEEN TWO SPANISH PARTIES - GOVERNED BY SPANISH LAW TERMINATION OF CONTRACT FOR FUNDAMENTAL BREACH - NOTION OF "FUNDAMENTAL BREACH" - REFERENCE TO ARTICLE 7.3.1 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES, ARTICLES 8:101 AND 8:103 PRINCIPLES OF EUROPEAN CONTRACT LAW AND ARTICLE 49(1) CISG BUYER'S FAILURE TO PAY THE REMAINDER OF THE PRICE - DOES NOT AMOUNT TO A FUNDAMENTAL BREACH | |
|
Spain Audiencia Provincial de Santa Cruz de Tenerife 07-03-2012 BARTER AGREEMENT - BETWEEN TWO SPANISH INDIVIDUALS - REFERENCE TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES AND PRINCIPLES OF EUROPEAN CONTRACT LAW TO INTERPRET APPLICABLE DOMESTIC LAW (SPANISH LAW) - REFERENCE TO THE TWO INSTRUMENTS JUSTIFIED "ON ACCOUNT OF THE COMMON ORIGIN OF THE PROVISIONS THEREIN CONTAINED" TERMINATION FOR BREACH OF CONTRACT - ADMISSIBLE ONLY FOR BREACH OF FUNDAMENTAL NATURE (ART. 7.3.1 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES) | |
|
Spain Tribunal Supremo 15-06-2015 BARTER AGREEMENT - BETWEEN SPANISH INDIVIDUALS - REFERENCE TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES AND PRINCIPLES OF EUROPEAN CONTRACT LAW TO INTERPRET APPLICABLE DOMESTIC LAW (SPANISH LAW) TERMINATION OF CONTRACT FOR FUNDAMENTAL BREACH - NOTION OF "FUNDAMENTAL BREACH" - REFERENCE TO ARTICLE 7.3.1 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES, ARTICLES 8:101 AND 8:103 PRINCIPLES OF EUROPEAN CONTRACT LAW AND ARTICLE 49(1) CISG NOTION OF FUNDAMENTAL BREACH - INDEPENDENT OF THE INTENTION OF THE BREACHING PARTY | |
|
United Kingdom House of Lords 01-07-2009 LONG-TERM CONTRACTS - CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT - BETWEEN TWO ENGLISH COMPANIES - CONTRACT INTERPRETATION ACCORDING TO ENGLISH LAW - TRADITIONAL RULE THAT EVIDENCE OF PRE-CONTRACTUAL NEGOTIATIONS TO INTERPRET CONTRACT CLAUSE INADMISSIBLE CONFIRMED - DIFFERENT APPROACH INSPIRED BY UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES, PRINCIPLES OF EUROPEAN CONTRACT LAW AND CISG REFLECTING FRENCH PHILOSOPHY OF CONTRACT INTERPRETATION - AS SUCH INCOMPATIBLE WITH ENGLISH LAW | |
|
USA United States District Court, S.D. Florida 30-03-2007 DISPUTE BETWEEN AN INDIAN EMPLOYEE AND A BERMUDAN EMPLOYER NEW YORK CONVENTION ON THE RECOGNITION AND ENFORCEMENT OF FOREIGN ARBITRAL AWARDS - INTERPRETATION OF ARTICLE II(3) - REFERENCE TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES ALLEGED INVALIDITY OF ARBITRATION CLAUSE BY REASON OF UNEQUAL BARGAINING POWER BETWEEN THE PARTIES - CLAIMANT'S REFERENCE TO ART. 3.10 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES [ART. 3.2.7 OF THE 2010 EDITION] AND TO ARTS. 4:109 AND 4:110 PRINCIPLES OF EUROPEAN CONTRACT LAW - CLAIM DISMISSED BECAUSE “IT IS DOUBTFUL THAT THERE EXISTS A PRECISE, UNIVERSAL DEFINITION OF THE UNEQUAL BARGAINING POWER DEFENSE THAT MAY BE APPLIED EFFECTIVELY ACROSS THE RANGE OF COUNTRIES THAT ARE PARTIES TO THE CONVENTION” | |
|
USA New York Court of Appeals 10-02-2022 INSURANCE CONTRACT - BETWEEN A UNITED STATES INDIVIDUAL AND A UNITED STATES COMPANY INTERPRETATION OF THE CONTRACT UNDER THE LAW OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK - CONTRA PROFERENTEM RULE - REFERENCE TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES (ART. 4.6) AND PRINCIPLES OF EUROPEAN CONTRACT LAW (ART. 5:103) | |
| FINNISH | 1 |
| FOOD AND AGRICULTURE ORGANIZATION OF THE UNITED NATIONS (FAO) | 1 |
| FOOTBALL ASSOCIATION OF WALES | 1 |
| FRENCH | 38 |
| GEORGIAN | 6 |
| GERMAN | 27 |
| GERMAN DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC | 1 |
| GIBRALTAR | 1 |
| GREEK | 4 |
| HONG KONG | 4 |
| HUNGARIAN | 3 |
| INDIAN | 11 |
| INDONESIAN | 1 |
| INTERNATIONAL FUND FOR AGRICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT (IFAD) | 1 |
| INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATION | 3 |
| IRANIAN | 10 |
| IRAQI | 1 |
| IRISH | 1 |
| ISRAELI | 2 |
| ITALIAN | 52 |
| IVORIAN | 1 |
| JAPANESE | 5 |
| KAZAKH | 5 |
| KOREAN | 4 |
| KUWAITI | 5 |
| KYRGYZ | 1 |
| LATIN AMERICAN | 2 |
| LEBANESE | 7 |
| LIBYAN | 1 |
| LIECHTENSTEIN | 5 |
| LITHUANIAN | 17 |
| LUXEMBOURG | 1 |
| MALAYSIAN | 3 |
| MARSHALLESE | 1 |
| MEMBER FIRMS OF THE ANDERSEN WORLDWIDE ORGANIZATION | 1 |
| MEXICAN | 5 |
| MIDDLE EASTERN | 4 |
| MOLDAVIAN | 1 |
| MOROCCAN | 2 |
| NEW ZEALAND | 5 |
| NIGERIAN | 1 |
| NORTH AFRICAN | 2 |
| NORTH AMERICAN | 4 |
| NORWEGIAN | 2 |
| PAKISTANI | 2 |
| PANAMANIAN | 2 |
| PARAGUAYAN | 34 |
| PHILIPPINE | 2 |
| PLURALITY OF PARTIES OF DIFFERENT NATIONALITIES | 7 |
| POLISH | 14 |
| PORTUGUESE | 3 |
| PUERTO RICAN | 1 |
| ROMANIAN | 13 |
| RUSSIAN | 102 |
| RWANDESE | 1 |
| SALVADORAN | 1 |
| SAUDI ARABIAN | 1 |
| SCANDINAVIAN | 1 |
| SCOTTISH | 1 |
| SERBIAN | 2 |
| SINGAPOREAN | 5 |
| SLOVAKIAN | 1 |
| SLOVENIAN | 1 |
| SOUTH AFRICAN | 1 |
| SOUTH KOREAN | 1 |
| SOUTHWEST ASIAN | 1 |
| SPANISH | 43 |
| STATE OF THE FORMER SOVIET UNION | 1 |
| SWEDISH | 8 |
| SWISS | 26 |
| TURKISH | 8 |
| TURKMEN | 1 |
| UKRAINIAN | 26 |
| UNION OF EUROPEAN FOOTBALL ASSOCIATIONS (UEFA) | 1 |
| UNITED KINGDOM | 3 |
| UNITED NATIONS ORGANIZATION | 2 |
| UNITED STATES | 46 |
| URUGUAYAN | 3 |
| UZBEK | 3 |
| VENEZUELAN | 5 |
| VIETNAMESE | 1 |
| WEST INDIAN | 2 |
| WESTERN EUROPEAN | 2 |
SELECTED CASES BY DOMESTIC LAW INVOLVED
BY INTERNATIONAL LAW INVOLVED
|
Arbitral Award ICC International Court of Arbitration, Paris 7365/FMS 05-05-1997 STATE CONTRACTS - CONTRACT FOR THE SUPPLY AND INSTALLATION OF MILITARY EQUIPMENT - BETWEEN A UNITED STATES CORPORATION AND THE IRANIAN AIR FORCE - PARTIES' CHOICE OF DOMESTIC LAW (IRANIAN LAW) - AGREEMENT BY PARTIES AS TO COMPLEMENTARY AND SUPPLEMENTARY APPLICATION OF THE GENERAL PRINCIPLES OF INTERNATIONAL LAW AND TRADE USAGES - ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL REFERENCE TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES TO DETERMINE CONTENT OF SUCH GENERAL PRINCIPLES HARDSHIP - RIGHT TO DEMAND TERMINATION OR ADAPTATION OF CONTRACT (ART. 6.2.3(4) UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES) IMPLIED OBLIGATIONS - GOOD FAITH AND FAIR DEALING (ARTS. 5.1 AND 5.2 [ARTS. 5.1.1 AND 5.1.2 OF THE 2004 EDITION] UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES) TERMINATION - RIGHT TO RESTITUTION (ART. 7.3.6 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES) INTEREST - RIGHT TO INTEREST INDEPENDENT OF A FORMAL REQUEST BY AGGRIEVED PARTY (ART. 7.4.9 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES) - DOUBTFUL WHETHER THIS PROVISION CORRESPONDS TO GENERALLY ACCEPTED PRINCIPLES OF INTERNATIONAL LAW |
|
Arbitral Award ICC International Court of Arbitration 12111 06-01-2003 SALES CONTRACT - BETWEEN A RUMANIAN COMPANY AND AN ENGLISH COMPANY - REFERRING TO "INTERNATIONAL LAW" AS THE LAW GOVERNING THE CONTRACT - TO BE UNDERSTOOD AS REFERENCE TO THE GENERAL PRINCIPLES OF LAW AND THE LEX MERCATORIA - APPLICATION OF THE UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES (PARAGRAPH 3 OF THE PREAMBLE OF THE UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES) PRINCIPLES OF EUROPEAN CONTRACT LAW - ACADEMIC EXERCISE PRELIMINARY TO A EUROPEAN CIVIL CODE - AS SUCH NOT YET APPLICABLE TO INTERNATIONAL COMMERCIAL CONTRACTS |
|
Arbitral Award Arbitration Institute of the Stockholm Chamber of Commerce 29-03-2005 STATE CONTRACTS - LONG-TERM CONTRACTS - GAS SUPPLY CONTRACT - BETWEEN A GIBRALTAR COMPANY AND A KYRGYZ STATE OWNED COMPANY - UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES APPLIED AS A RULE OF INTERNATIONAL LAW BUYER'S FAILURE TO PAY THE PRICE DUE TO INSOLVENCY CAUSED BY INTERFERENCE BY ITS COUNTRY'S GOVERNMENT - GOVERNMENT LIABLE FOR DAMAGES VIS-A-VIS SELLER INTEREST - TO BE CALCULATED ON THE BASIS OF INTERNATIONAL RULES - APPLICATION OF ART. 7.4.9 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES CONSIDERED BY ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL "TO BE AN APPROPRIATE BASIS FOR DETERMINING THE INTEREST" |
|
Arbitral Award Ad hoc Arbitration, Brussels 19-08-2005 STATE CONTRACTS - SHARE PURCHASE AGREEMENT - BETWEEN A DUTCH COMPANY AND THE POLISH GOVERNMENT - TO BE DECIDED ON THE BASIS OF THE BILATERAL TREATY FOR THE PROTECTION OF INVESTMENTS AND "THE UNIVERSALLY ACKNOWLEDGED RULES AND PRINCIPLES OF INTERNATIONAL LAW" - REFERENCE TO THE UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES |
|
Arbitral Award ICC International Court of Arbitration 14581 00-06-2007 STATE CONTRACTS - SUPPLY CONTRACT FOR LEASING EQUIPMENT AND LICENSING TECHNOLOGY - BETWEEN TWO MINISTRIES OF STATE X AND A COMPANY OF STATE Y - UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES AS AN "EXPRESSION OF INTERNATIONALLY RECOGNISED PRINCIPLES" ARBITRATION CLAUSE PROVIDING THAT DISPUTES TO BE DECIDED BY "THE INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION COURT IN SWITZERLAND" AND "IN ACCORDANCE WITH INTERNATIONAL LAW" - INTERPRETATION OF AMBIGUOUS CLAUSE ACCORDING TO SWISS LAW AS LAW OF SEAT OF ARBITRATION AND ACCORDING TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES INVOKED BY PARTES AS "EXPRESSION OF INTERNATIONALLY RECOGNISED PRINCIPLES", TOGETHER WITH EUROPEAN PRINCIPLES OF CONTRACT LAW AND CISG - REFERENCE TO ARTICLE 4.2 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES IN SUPPORT OF SIMILAR PROVISION IN SWISS LAW |
|
Arbitral Award Eritrea Ethiopia Claims Commission 17-08-2009 ERITREA ETHIOPIA CLAIMS COMMISSION - DAMAGES CLAIMS - REFERENCE TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES TO INTERPRET APPLICABLE INTERNATIONAL LAW DETERMINATION OF COMPENSATION FOR UNCERTAIN LOSSES - ASSESSMENT AT DISCRETION OF ADJUDICATING BODY - REFERENCE TO ARTICLE 7.4.3(3) UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES |
|
Arbitral Award Ad hoc Arbitration, The Hague 30-03-2010 STATE CONTRACTS - LONG-TERM CONTRACTS - EXPLORATION AND EXPLOITATION AGREEMENT - BETWEEN TWO UNITED STATES COMPANIES AND THE ECUADORIAN GOVERNMENT – REFERENCE TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES TO INTERPRET APPLICABLE LAW (INTERNATIONAL LAW AS WELL AS ECUADORIAN LAW) LOSS OF A CHANCE – CRITERION FOR DETERMINING AMOUNT OF DAMAGES IN CASE OF BREACH OF THE BIT DUE TO DENIAL OF JUSTICE – REFERENCE BY ONE OF THE PARTIES TO ARTICLE 7.4.3(2) OF UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES – ACCORDING TO ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL ONLY ADMISSIBLE WHERE AMOUNT OF LOSS NOT DETERMINABLE – REFERENCE TO COMMENT 2 TO ARTICLE 7.4.3 OF UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES FORCE MAJEURE – HARDSHIP – DISTRIBUTION BETWEEN THE PARTIES IN A JUST AND EQUITABLE MANNER OF THE LOSSES AND GAINS RESULTING FROM UNFORESEEABLE EVENT – REFERENCE TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES (COMMENT ARTICLES 7.1.7 AND TO ARTICLES 6.2.2 – 6.2.3(2)) AND TO PRINCIPLES OF EUROPEAN CONTRACT LAW (ARTICLE 6:111(3)(B)) AS A MEANS TO INTERPRET ECUADORIAN LAW (ARTICLE 1563 ECUADORIAN CIVIL CODE) |
|
Arbitral Award ICC International Court of Arbitration 17146 00-00-2013 INTERNATIONAL CONTRACT - REFERENCE TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES TO INTERPRET AND SUPPLEMENT APPLICABLE INTERNATIONAL LAW (TRANSNATIONAL RULES AND TRADE USAGES) ARBITRATION CLAUSE - INTERPRETATION - ACCORDING TO PRINCIPLE OF GOOD FAITH, OF EFFECTIVE INTERPRETATION AND OF CONTRA PROFERENTEM RULE - REFERENCE TO ART. 4.5 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES |
|
Arbitral Award Permanent Court of Arbitration 04-06-2014 DISPUTE BETWEEN AN AUSTRIAN COMPANY AND THE SLOVAKIAN GOVERNMENT - CONCERNING MEASURES ADOPTED BY THE LATTER NEGATIVELY AFFECTING FOREIGN INVESTMENTS IN THE HEALTH INSURANCE SECTOR - ALLEGED VIOLATION BY SLOVAKIA OF BILATERAL INVESTMENT TREATIES - REFERENCE TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES TO SUPPLEMENT APPLICABLE LAW (INTERNATIONAL LAW) JURISDICTION OF ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL CHALLENGED ON THE GROUND THAT CLAIMANT INITIATED COURT PROCEEDINGS IN THE SLOVAK REPUBLIC THAT WERE PREDICATED ON THE SAME FACTS AND LEGAL BASIS AND SOUGHT THE SAME RELIEF AS IN THE ARBITRAL PROCEEDING IMPLIED AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE PARTIES THAT THE CASE SHOULD BE RESOLVED IN THE NATIONAL COURTS, NOT IN THE ARBITRATION PROCEEDINGS – REFERENCE BY BOTH PARTIES TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES (ARTS. 1.2, 2.1.2, 2.1.11, 3.2.12, 4.1 AND 4.2) – ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL AGREES WITH CLAIMANT THAT NO SUCH AGREEMENT WAS CONCLUDED WAIVER OF THE RIGHT TO ARBITRATE – REFERENCE BY BOTH PARTIES TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES – ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL CONFIRMS THAT CLAIMANT HAS WAIVED ITS RIGHT TO ARBITRATE SINCE THE PROCEEDING BEFORE NATIONAL COURTS COULD NOT BE CONSIDERED ONLY AS A PRECAUTIONARY MEASURE |
|
Arbitral Award International Arbitration Court of the Chamber of Commerce and Industry of the Russian Federation 03-04-2018 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 |
|
Arbitral Award Permanent Court of Arbitration 10-01-2019 STATE CONTRACTS - LONG-TERM CONTRACTS - CONCESSION CONTRACT - BETWEEN UNITED STATES INVESTORS AND THE CANADIAN GOVERNMENT – BREACH OF THE LATTER OBLIGATIONS UNDER THE NORTH AMERICA FREE TRADE AGREEMENT (NAFTA) - REFERENCE TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES IN SUPPORT OF GENERAL PRINCIPLE OF INTERNATIONAL LAW DAMAGES FOR LOSS OF A CHANCE - RIGHT TO COMPENSATION - REFERENCE TO ART. 7.4.3 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES DAMAGES – COMPENSATION FOR FUTURE HARM DUE WHEN THERE IS A REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY FOR SUCCESS – REFERENCE TO ART. 7.4.3 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES |
|
International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) 04-06-2004 STATE CONTRACTS - LONG-TERM CONTRACTS - BUILD-OPERATE-TRANSFER (BOT) CONTRACT FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF ELECTRICITY PLANT IN TURKEY - BETWEEN A UNITED STATES-TURKISH CONSORTIUM AND THE TURKISH GOVERNMENT - REFERENCE TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES TO INTERPRET APPLICABLE LAW (INTERNATIONAL LAW) CONTRACT WITH ESSENTIAL TERMS DELIBERATELY LEFT OPEN AND TO BE AGREED UPON AT LATER DATE - CONTRACT VALID IF PARTIES INTENDED TO BE BOUND BY THE CONTRACT - REFERENCE BY CLAIMANT TO ART. 2.14 (NOW 2.1.14) OF THE UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES- ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL CONFIRMED |
|
International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) 19-01-2007 STATE CONTRACTS - LONG-TERM CONTRACTS - CONCESSION CONTRACT - BETWEEN A UNITED STATES-TURKISH CONSORTIUM AND THE TURKISH GOVERNMENT - REFERENCE TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES TO INTERPRET APPLICABLE LAW (INTERNATIONAL LAW) CONCESSION CONTRACT CONCLUDED WITH TERMS LEFT OPEN - ONE PARTY ARGUED THAT NEVERTHELESS CONTRACT HAD BEEN VALIDLY CONCLUDED INVOKING ARTICLE 2.1.14 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES IN SUPPORT THEREOF - ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL BASICALLY CONFIRMS ONE PARTY ARGUED THAT DUTY TO NEGOTIATE IN GOOD FAITH DOES NOT ENTAIL OBLIGATION TO REACH AGREEMENT INVOKING ARTICLE 2.1.15 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES - ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL BASICALLY CONFIRMS |
|
International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) 01-09-2009 APPLICATION FOR ANNULMENT OF AN ICSID AWARD RENDERED BETWEEN A UNITED STATES CORPORATION AND THE ARGENTINIAN GOVERNMENT - REFERENCE TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES TO INTERPRET APPLICABLE LAW (INTERNATIONAL LAW) DETERMINATION OF EXTENT OF HARM - DISCRETIONARY POWER OF COURTS WHERE AMOUNT CANNOT BE ESTABLISHED WITH SUFFICIENT DEGREE OF CERTAINTY - REFERENCE BY CLAIMANT TO ARTICLE 7.4.3 (3) UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES - STANDARD OF COMPENSATION CONFIRMED BY BOTH ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL AND AD HOC COMMITTEE |
|
International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) 14-01-2010 STATE CONTRACTS – SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT - BETWEEN A UNITED STATES NATIONAL AND THE UKRAINIAN GOVERNMENT - REFERRING TO ARTICLE 54 OF THE ICSID ADDITIONAL FACILITY ARBITRATION RULES RECORDED AS TO THE APPLICABLE LAW - APPLICATION BY ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL OF THE UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES AS "A PRIVATE CODIFICATION OF CIVIL LAW, APPROVED BY AN INTERGOVERNMENTAL INSTITUTION WHICH ARE NEITHER TREATY, NOR COMPILATION OF USAGES, NOR STANDARD TERMS OF CONTRACT BUT IN FACT ARE A MANIFESTATION OF TRANSNATIONAL LAW" - REFERENCE TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES TO INTERPRET APPLICABLE LAW (INTERNATIONAL LAW) CONTRACT INTERPRETATION - ACCORDING TO COMMON INTENTION OF PARTIES - RELEVANCE OF PRELIMINARY NEGOTIATIONS - REFERENCE TO ARTICLES 4.1 AND 4.3 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES MERGER CLAUSE - REFERENCE TO ARTICLE 2.1.17 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES INCONSISTENT BEHAVIOUR - REFERENCE TO ARTICLE 1.8 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES DUTY TO USE BEST EFFORTS - REFERENCE TO ARTICLE 5.1.4 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES |
|
International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) 03-03-2010 STATE CONTRACTS - LONG-TERM CONTRACTS - CONCESSION AGREEMENT -BETWEEN GREEK AND ISRAELI INVESTORS AND THE GEORGIAN GOVERNMENT - CONCERNING THE CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF OIL PIPELINES - REFERENCE TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES TO INTERPRET APPLICABLE LAW (INTERNATIONAL LAW) DISPUTE BETWEEN PARTIES AS TO SCOPE OF THE CONCESSION - WHETHER EXTRINSIC EVIDENCE ADMISSIBLE FOR THE PURPOSE OF CONSTRUING THE CONCESSION AGREEMENT - REFERENCE BY ONE OF THE PARTIES TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES IN SUPPORT OF ADMISSIBILITY - ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL, THOUGH WITHOUT EXPRESSLY REFERRING TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES, BASICALLY CONCURRED |
|
International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) 16-06-2010 STATE CONTRACTS - LONG-TERM CONTRACTS - CONCESSION CONTRACT - BETWEEN FRENCH AND ARGENTINIAN COMPANIES AND THE MEXICAN GOVERNMENT – BIT AND GENERAL INTERNATIONAL LAW APPLICABLE - REFERENCE TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES IN SUPPORT OF GENERAL PRINCIPLE OF INTERNATIONAL LAW DAMAGES – COMPENSATION DUE ONLY FOR HARM, INCLUDING FUTURE HARM, ESTABLISHED WITH REASONABLE DEGREE OF CERTAINTY – REFERENCE TO ART. 36 ILC DRAFT ARTICLES ON RESPONSIBILITY OF STATES FOR INTERNATIONALLY WRONGFUL ACTS OF 2001 AND TO ART. 7.4.3 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES |
|
International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) 28-03-2011 STATE CONTRACTS – SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT - BETWEEN A UNITED STATES NATIONAL AND THE UKRAINIAN GOVERNMENT - ALLEGED BREACH OF SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT - APPLICATION BY ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL OF THE UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES AS "A PRIVATE CODIFICATION OF CIVIL LAW, APPROVED BY AN INTERGOVERNMENTAL INSTITUTION WHICH ARE NEITHER TREATY, NOR COMPILATION OF USAGES, NOR STANDARD TERMS OF CONTRACT BUT IN FACT ARE A MANIFESTATION OF TRANSNATIONAL LAW" - REFERENCE TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES TO SUPPLEMENT APPLICABLE LAW (INTERNATIONAL LAW) DAMAGES FOR LOST PROFITS - TO BE DISTINGUISHED FROM DAMAGES FOR SIMPLE LOSS OF A CHANCE - REFERENCE TO THE EXAMPLE IN COMMENT 2 TO ART. 7.4.3 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES INCONSISTENT BEHAVIOUR - REFERENCE TO ARTICLE 1.8 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES |
|
International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) 12-05-2011 DISPUTE BETWEEN A SWISS COMPANY AND THE GOVERNMENT OF THE CENTRAL AFRICAN REPUBLIC - CONCERNING MEASURES ADOPTED BY THE LATTER NEGATIVELY AFFECTING FOREIGN INVESTMENTS IN THE TOBACCO SECTOR - ICSID ARBITRATION CLAUSE CONTAINED IN A MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING (PROTOCOL OF AGREEMENT) CONCLUDED BETWEEN THE PARTIES - REFERENCE TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES TO INTERPRET APPLICABLE LAW (INTERNATIONAL LAW) JURISDICTION OF ICSID ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL CHALLENGED ON THE GROUND THAT AGREEMENT CONTAINING THE ARBITRATION CLAUSE WAS NULL AND VOID - LACK OF PRIOR APPROVAL BY THE MINISTRY OF FINANCE - RESPONDENT CANNOT INVOKE THE VIOLATION OF ITS LOCAL LAW TO CONSIDER ITS CONSENT TO ARBITRATION VITIATED OR NULL SEVERABILITY OF THE ARBITRATION CLAUSE - CLAIMANT INVOKING ART. 3.16 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES ON PARTIAL AVOIDANCE [NOW ART. 3.2.13] - ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL CONCURS |
|
International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) 31-10-2011 DISPUTE BETWEEN A UNITED STATES INVESTOR AND THE ARGENTINIAN GOVERNMENT - CONCERNING ALLEGED VIOLATION BY THE LATTER OF BILATERAL INVESTMENT TREATY (BIT) - ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL DECIDED TO APPLY THE BIT AND "INTERNATIONAL LAW, WHEN APPLICABLE" - REFERENCE TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES "A SORT OF INTERNATIONAL RESTATEMENT OF THE LAW OF CONTRACTS REFLECTING RULES AND PRINCIPLES APPLIED BY THE MAJORITY OF NATIONAL LEGAL SYSTEMS". DEFENDANT INVOKING FORCE MAJEURE AS EXCUSE FOR VIOLATION OF BIT - OBJECTION REJECTED ON GROUND OF GENERAL PRINCIPLE OF "PRECLUSION OF WRONGFULNESS" - REFERENCE TO ARTICLES 6.2.2, 7.1.6 AND 7.1.7 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES |
|
International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) 01-06-2012 DISPUTE BETWEEN A UNITED STATES COMPANY AND THE SALVADORAN GOVERNMENT OVER THE LATTER'S ARBITRARY REFUSAL TO GRANT THE FORMER A MINING EXPLOITATION CONCESSION - REFERENCE TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES TO INTERPRET APPLICABLE LAW (INTERNATIONAL LAW) JURISDICTION OF ICSID ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL CHALLENGED ON THE GROUND THAT DISPUTE HAD ARISEN WHEN CLAIMANT WAS NOT YET A UNITED STATES COMPANY BREACH OF AN OBLIGATION UNDER INVESTMENT TREATY BY OMISSION - EXPLICIT REFUSAL TO GRANT CONCESSION NOT NECESSARY - MERE FAILURE TO RESPOND TO APPLICATION SUFFICIENT - REFERENCE TO ARTICLE 7.1.1 UNDIROIT PRINCIPLES |
|
International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) 18-04-2017 STATE CONTRACTS – SHARE PURCHASE AGREEMENT - BETWEEN TWO ITALIAN NATIONALS AND THE ROMANIAN GOVERNMENT - ALLEGED VIOLATION BY THE LATTER OF BILATERAL INVESTMENT TREATY - REFERENCE TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES TO INTERPRET APPLICABLE LAW (INTERNATIONAL LAW) COMPENSATION FOR LOSS OF OPPORTUNITY - CAN BE AWARDED ON THE BASIS OF INTERNATIONAL LAW - REFERENCE TO ART. 7.4.3 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES DETERMINATION OF EXTENT OF HARM - DISCRETIONARY POWER OF COURTS WHERE AMOUNT CANNOT BE ESTABLISHED WITH SUFFICIENT DEGREE OF CERTAINTY - IN CASE OF LOSS OF OPPORTUNITY MUST BE TAKEN IN CONSIDERATION THE PROBABILITY OF THE CHANCE COMING TO FRUITION - REFERENCE TO THE EXAMPLE IN COMMENT 2 TO ART. 7.4.3 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES |
|
International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) 30-10-2017 STATE CONTRACTS – LONG-TERM CONTRACTS - SUPPLY CONTRACT - BETWEEN TWO SWISS COMPANIES AND THE VENEZUELAN GOVERNMENT - ALLEGED VIOLATION BY THE LATTER OF BILATERAL INVESTMENT TREATY - REFERENCE TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES TO INTERPRET APPLICABLE LAW (INTERNATIONAL LAW) DETERMINATION OF EXTENT OF HARM - DISSENTING OPINION OF ONE OF THE ARBITRATORS - COMPENSATION ONLY FOR FORESEEABLE HARM - REFERENCE TO ART. 7.4.4 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES AND ART. 74 CISG DETERMINATION OF EXTENT OF HARM - DISSENTING OPINION OF ONE OF THE ARBITRATORS - LOSS OF PROFITS CALCULATED AS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE CONTRACT PRICE AND THE PRICE PAID BY THE BUYER FOR REPLACEMENT GOODS OR THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE CONTRACT PRICE AND THE MARKET PRICE AT THE TIME DELIVERIES SHOULD HAVE BEEN MADE IF REPLACEMENT GOODS ARE NOT PURCHASED - REFERENCE TO ARTS. 7.4.5-7.4.6 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES AND ART. 75-76 CISG |
|
Iranian-U.S. Arbitral Tribunal Iranian-U.S. Arbitral Tribunal (Full Tribunal) 02-07-2014 DISPUTE BETWEEN IRAN AND THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA CONCERNING ALLEGED BREACH BY UNITED STATES OF ITS OBLIGATION UNDER ARTICLE VII, PARAGRAPH 2, OF THE 1981 CLAIMS SETTLEMENT DECLARATION ESTABLISHING THE IRAN-UNITED STATES CLAIMS TRIBUNAL – ACCORDING TO ARTICLE V OF THE 1981 CLAIMS SETTLEMENT DECLARATION TRIBUNAL BOUND TO “DECIDE ALL CASES ON THE BASIS OF RESPECT FOR LAW, APPLYING SUCH CHOICE OF LAW RULES AND PRINCIPLES OF COMMERCIAL AND INTERNATIONAL LAW AS THE TRIBUNAL DETERMINES TO BE APPLICABLE, TAKING INTO ACCOUNT RELEVANT USAGES OF TRADE, CONTRACT PROVISIONS AND CHANGED CIRCUMSTANCES” UNITED STATES ORDERED TO PAY IRAN DAMAGES PLUS INTEREST – INTEREST CALCULATED “AT AN ANNUAL RATE EQUAL TO THE AVERAGE PRIME BANK LENDING RATE IN THE UNITED STATES” – TRIBUNAL SO DECIDED “[…] ALSO MINDFUL OF ARTICLE 7.4.9 (2) OF THE UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES 2010” |
|
Netherlands Gerechtshof Den Haag 11-09-2013 STATE CONTRACTS - SUPPLY CONTRACT - BETWEEN AN ENGLISH COMPANY AND AN IRANIAN GOVERNMENT AGENCY - REFERENCE TO UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES TO INTERPRET APPLICABLE LAW (INTERNATIONAL LAW) REQUEST FOR SETTING ASIDE OF ARBITRAL AWARDS APPLYING THE UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES AS RULES OF LAW GOVERNING THE SUBSTANCE OF THE DISPUTE - REQUEST REJECTED BY COURT (DUTCH COURT) APPLICATION BY ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL ON ITS OWN MOTION OF ARTICLE 7.4.3(3) UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES - OBJECTION THAT ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL HAD EXCEEDED ITS MANDATE - REJECTED LIMITATION PERIODS - A PARTY'S OBJECTION THAT OTHER PARTY'S CLAIMS WERE TIME-BARRED REJECTED BY ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL AS THE 1994 EDITION OF UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES DID NOT ADDRESS THE ISSUE LIMITATION PERIODS - ARGUMENT THAT THE ISSUE WAS ADDRESSED IN THE SUBSEQUENT 2004 EDITION OF UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES REJECTED - RETROACTIVE EFFECT OF SUBSEQUENT EDITIONS OF UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES DENIED |
|
Venezuela Civil Chamber of the Venezuelan Supreme Court 02-12-2014 CONTRACT BETWEEN A VENEZUELAN COMPANY AND A DUTCH COMPANY - SILENT AS TO APPLICABLE LAW - CONTRACT GOVERNED BY THE LAW WITH WHICH IT IS MOST DIRECTLY CONNECTED - TO BE DETERMINED ON THE BASIS, AMONG OTHERS, OF GENERAL PRINCIPLES OF INTERNATIONAL COMMERCIAL LAW RECOGNIZED BY INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS (ART. 30 VENEZUELAN ACT ON PRIVATE INTERNATIONAL LAW) - UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES EXPRESSLY REFERRED TO AS AN EXAMPLE OF SUCH GENERAL PRINCIPLES |
|
Venezuela Civil Chamber of the Venezuelan Supreme Court 17-03-2023 BILL OF EXCHANGE - SIGNED BY VENEZUELAN INDIVIDUALS IN CURAÇAO – APPLICABLE LAW IN THE ABSENCE OF A CHOICE OF THE PARTIES – REFERENCE TO LEX MERCATORIA CONTAINED IN THE NATIONAL PRIVATE INTERNATIONAL LAW - APPLICATION OF THE UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES AS AN EXPRESSION OF THE LEX MERCATORIA LAW APPLICABLE TO A BILL OF EXCHANGE - MONETARY OBLIGATION FOR WHICH THE PARTIES DID NOT CHOOSE THE APPLICABLE LAW - OBLIGATION SUBJECT TO THE LAW OF THE PLACE OF PERFORMANCE - OBLIGEE’S PLACE OF BUSINESS” AS THE PLACE OF PERFORMANCE (ART. 6.1.6[1][a] UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES). |