PDF, U.S. letter size, portrait/vertical document

Tribunale di Vigevano: Specific Aspects 

of the CISG Uniformly Dealt With 

Franco Ferrari 

copy @ cisgw3.law.pace.edu/

CISG Database, Pace Institute of International Commercial Law. Reproduced with permission 

of 20 “Journal of Law and Commerce” (Spring 2001) 225-239; 

SiSU cisgw3.law.pace.edu/ ii

Contents 

Contents 

Tribunale di Vigevano: Specific Aspects of the CISG Uniformly Dealt With, 

Franco Ferrari 1 

I. Autonomous Interpretation of the CISG . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 

II. Interpreting the CISG in Light of Foreign Case Law . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 

III. Uniform Interpretation and Application of the CISG by Courts Prior to the Decision 

of the Tribunale di Vigevano . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 

IV. The Importance of the Decision of the Tribunale di Vigevano . . . . . . . . . . 6 

V. Exclusion of the CISG . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 

VI. Timely Notice of Non-Conformity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 

VII. Specificity of the Notice of Non-Conformity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 

VIII. Burden of Proof Under the CISG . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 

IX. Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 

Metadata 15 

SiSU Metadata, document information . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 

SiSU cisgw3.law.pace.edu/ iii

Tribunale di Vigevano: Specific Aspects of the CISG Uniformly Dealt With 

Tribunale di Vigevano: Specific Aspects of the CISG Uniformly Dealt 1 

With, 

Franco Ferrari * 

I. Autonomous Interpretation of the CISG 2 

It is common knowledge 1 that in order to create international legal uniformity, it is insuffi- 3 

cient to merely create and enact uniform laws or uniform law conventions, 2 because “even 

when outward uniformity is achieved [...], uniform application of the agreed rules is by no 

means guaranteed, as in practice different countries almost inevitably come to put different 

interpretations upon the same enacted words.” 3 The drafters of the most recent international 

uniform commercial law conventions were aware of this, as evidenced by the fact that 

they inserted into these conventions provisions designed to reduce the danger of diverging 

interpretations. 4 This is also true as far as the United Nations Convention on Contracts for 

the International Sale of Goods, 5 (CISG) 6 is concerned. According to Article [page 225] 

7(1), 7 in interpreting the CISG, “regard is to be had to its international character and to the 

need to promote uniformity in its application.” According to many legal writers who have 

dealt with interpretation of the CISG, 8 this means that in interpreting it one should always 

1 See, e.g., Dieter Martiny, Autonome und einheitliche Auslegung im Europäischen Internationalen 

Zivilprozeßrecht, RABELS ZEITSCHRIFT FÜR AUSLÄNDISCHES UND INTERNATIONALES 

PRIVATRECHT 427, 427 (1981). 

2 Lisa M. Ryan, The Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods: Divergent 

Interpretations, 4 TUL. J . INT'L and COMP. L. 99, 101 (1995), stating that “textual uniformity [...] is 

insufficient.” 

3 R.J.C. Munday, Comment, The Uniform Interpretation of International Conventions, 27 INT'L and COMP. 

L.Q. 450 (1978). 

4 It has often been stated that it is only possible to reduce the danger of diverging interpretations; it is not 

possible to eliminate them altogether; see, e.g., JOSEPH M. LOOKOFSKY, CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES 

IN COMPARATIVE CONTEXT 294 (1989). 

5 See the United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods, opened for 

signature April 11, 1980, 19 I.L.M. 668 (entered into force Jan. 1, 1998) [hereinafter CISG]. 

6 Many abbreviations have been used for the United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International 

Sale of Goods; for a court decision which lists several, see OLG Frankfurt, April 20, 1994, RECHT DER 

INTERNATIONALEN WIRTSCHAFT 593, 593 (1994). For a discussion in legal writing of the various 

abbreviations, see, e.g., Axel Flessner and Thomas Kadner, CISG? Zur Suche nach einer Abkürzung für 

das Wiener Übereinkommen über Verträge über den internationalen Warenkauf, ZEITSCHRIFT FÜR 

EUROPÄISCHES PRIVATRECHT 347 ff. (1995). 

7 Art. 7(1) CISG: “In the interpretation of this Convention, regard is to be had to its international character 

and to the need to promote uniformity in its application and the observance of good faith in international 

trade.” 

8 Several papers have been written on the interpretation of the CISG; see, e.g., Jorge Adame Goddard, 

* Legal Officer, United Nations Office of Legal Affairs, International Trade Law Branch; Full Professor of 

Comparative Private Law, Bologna University Faculty of Law (on leave); the views expressed in this paper 

are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the United Nations. 

SiSU cisgw3.law.pace.edu/ 1


take into consideration that it is a result of international unification efforts, 9 i.e. that it was 

not elaborated, unlike any domestic statute, with any particular legal system or language in 

mind. 10 Thus, it has been suggested that it is necessary to read the CISG not through the 

lenses of domestic law, 11 but rather in an autonomous manner. 12 This is why in interpreting 

the CISG one should not resort to the meaning generally attached to certain expressions 

within the ambit of a particular legal system. 13 This is also true in those cases where the 

expressions adopted in the [page 226] various original versions of the CISG correspond 

to expressions to which a particular meaning is attached in specific legal systems, 14 provided 

that the legislative history does not show that an expression was chosen because a 

particular meaning attached to it. 15 

Reglas de interpretacion de la Convencion sobre Compraventa Internacional de Mercaderias, REVISTA 

DE INVESTIGACIONES JURIDICAS 9 ff. (1990); Michael J . Bonell, L'interpretazione del diritto uniforme 

alIa luce dell'art. 7 della convenzione di Vienna sulla vendita internazionale, RIVISTA DI DIRITTO CIVILE 

221 ff. (1986/II); V. Susanne Cook, Note, The Need for Uniform Interpretation of the 1980 United Nations 

Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods, 50 U. PITT. L.REV. 197 ff. (1988); Franco 

Ferrari, Interpretation uniforme de la Convention de 1980 sur la vente internationale, REVUE 

INTERNATIONALE DE DROIT COMPARE 813 ff. (1996); Maria d.P. Perales Viscasillas, Una 

aproximacion al articulo 7 de la Convencion de Viena de 1980 sobre compraventa intemacional de 

mercaderias, QUADERNOS DE DERECHO Y COMERCIO 55 ff. (1995/XVI). 

9 WERNER MELIS, Art. 7, in KOMMENTAR ZUM UN-KAUFRECHT 87 (Heinrich Honsell ed., Zürich 

1997); ROLAND LOEWE, INTERNATIONALES KAUFRECHT 32 (Vienna, 1989). 

10 MARTIN KAROLLUS, UN-KAUFRECHT. EINE SYSTEMATISCHE DARSTELLUNG FÜR STUDIUM 

UND PRAXIS 11 (Vienna, 1991). 

11 See, e.g., JohnO. Honnold, The Sales Convention in Action - Uniform International Words: Uniform 

Applications?, 8 J. L .and COM. 207, 208 (1988), where the author states that “one threat to international 

uniformity in interpretation is a natural tendency to read the international text through the lenses of 

domestic law.” 

See also Andrew Babiak, Defining “Fundamental Breach” under the United Nations Convention on 

Contracts for the International Sale of Goods, 6 TEMP. INT'L and COMP. L. J . 113, 117 (1992). 

12 BERNARD AUDIT, LA VENTE INTERNATIONALE DE MARCHANDISES 47 (Paris 1990); Michael J . 

Bonell, Commento all'art. 7 della Convenzione di Vienna, NUOVE LEGGI CIVILI COMMENTATE 21, 21 

(1989); Frank Diedrich, Maintaining Uniformity in International Uniform Law via Autonomous Interpretation: 

Software Contracts under the CISG, 8 PACE INT'L L.REV. 303 ff. (1996); CHRISTOPH HÄUSLER, DAS 

UNIDROIT ÜBEREINKOMMEN ÜBER INTERNATIONALES FACTORING (OTTAWA 1988) UNTER 

BESONDERER BERÜCKSICHTIGUNG SEINER ANWENDBARKEIT 135 (Frankfurt, 1998) (stating the 

same, albeit with reference to the 1988 UNIDROIT Convention on International Factoring). 

13 JOHNO. HONNOLD, UNIFORM LAW FOR INTERNATIONAL SALES UNDER THE UNITED NATIONS 

CONVENTION 136 (2d ed., Deventer 1991), stating that “the reading of a legal text in the light of the 

concepts of our domestic legal system [is] an approach that would violate the requirement that the 

Convention be interpreted with regard to its international character.” See also ULRICH MAGNUS, WlENER 

UN-KAUFRECHT (CISG) 153 (Berlin 1999); PETER SCHLECHTRIEM, INTERNATIONALES 

UN-KAUFRECHT 29-30 (Tübingen 1997). 

14 FRANK DIEDRICH, AUTONOME AUSLEGUNG VON INTERNATIONALEM EINHEITSRECHT 77 

(Baden- Baden, 1994). 

15 Franco Ferrari, Der Begriff des “internationalen Privatrechts” nach Art. 1 Abs. 1 lit. b) des UN-Kaufrechts, 

ZEITSCHRIFT FÜR EUROPÄISCHES PRIVATRECHT 162, 166 (1998); MAGNUS, supra note 13, at 153. 



What has been said thus far is true for the criteria to be used in the interpretation process 4 

as well. The CISG is not to be interpreted on the basis of “domestic” interpretive criteria, 

since this would be detrimental to the goal pursued, i.e. the unification of (sales) law, since 

in different legal systems different interpretive criteria are used. 16 

Various authors have, however, pointed out that in order to create uniform law, it is insuf- 5 

ficient to “autonomously” interpret uniform law instruments. 17 This becomes even more 

evident if one considers that there are instances where more than one “autonomous” interpretation 

of the same concept are plausible. In these instances uniformity will, despite 

an “autonomous” interpretation, not be guaranteed; according to some legal scholars, uniformity 

would in these cases merely amount to a “random occurrence.” 18 

II. Interpreting the CISG in Light of Foreign Case Law 6 

The drafters of the CISG were aware that although an “autonomous” interpretation would 7 

certainly promote uniformity, it would not necessarily guarantee it. This is why they provided 

not only for the obligation to “have regard to the Convention's international character,” 

but also for the obligation to have regard “to the need to promote uniformity in its application.” 

19 This is no surprise, given the close link between these two kinds of obligations: 20 

[page 227] They both tend to promote uniformity and are both based upon the knowledge 

that the elaboration of a uniform law instrument does not per se create uniformity. 21 

From the obligation to have regard to the need to promote uniformity in the CISG's ap- 8 

plication legal scholars have deduced, on the one hand, that “whoever has to apply the 

Convention, must make efforts to adopt solutions which are tenable on an international 

level, i.e. solutions which can be taken into consideration in other Contracting States as 

well.” 22 The more the various concepts are interpreted “autonomously,” the more this result 

16 DIEDRICH, supra note 14, at 59 ff.; Hein Kötz, Rechtsvereinheitlichung-Nutzen, Kosten, Methoden, Ziele, 

RABELS ZEITSCHRIFT FÜR AUSLÄNDISCHES UND INTERNATIONALES PRIVATRECHT 1, 8 (1986). 

17 FRITZ ENDERLEIN ET AL., INTERNATIONALES KAUFRECHT. KOMMENTAR 62 (Freiburg/Berlin, 

1991). 

18 Michael F. Sturley, International Uniform Laws in National Courts; The Influence of Domestic Law in 

Conflicts Interpretation, 27 VA. J.INT'L L. 729,738 (1987). 

19 MAGNUS, supra note 13, at 155. 

20 For similar statements, albeit referred to in the 1988 Unidroit Convention on International Factoring, see 

Ferrari, supra note 15, at 111 et seq. 

21 HÄUSLER, supra note 12, at 136 f. (albeit in respect to the 1988 UNIDROIT Convention on International 

Factoring). 

22 MAGNUS, supra note 13, at 155 (with respect to the CISG); see also HAUSLER, supra note 12, at 137 

(in respect of the 1988 UNIDROIT Convention on International Factoring); (in relazione alla Convenzione di 

Roma sulla legge applicabile alle obbligazioni contrattuali) Abbo Junker, Die einheitliche europäische 

Auslegung nach dem EG-Schuldvertragsübereinkommen, RABELS ZEITSCHRIFT FÜR 

AUSLÄNDISCHES UND INTERNATIONALES PRIVATRECHT 680 (1991) (in respect of the 1980 Rome 

Convention on the Law Applicable to Contractual Obligations). 



is able to be achieved. 23 On the other hand, both American 24 and foreign 25 legal writers 

have interpreted the aforementioned obligation to mean that in applying the CISG courts 

26 

have to take into account relevant decisions of other States. [page 228] 

Resorting to foreign case law undoubtedly promotes uniform application of the CISG. How- 9 

ever, requiring interpreters to consider foreign decisions can create practical difficulties, for 

two main reasons. 27 First, foreign case law is not readily available, i.e. it cannot easily be 

retrieved: Second, foreign case law is often written in a language unknown to the interpreter. 

28 

In order to overcome these obstacles, various steps have been undertaken. 29 UNCITRAL, 10 

for instance, publishes -- on the basis of a decision taken on the occasion of its twenty-first 

session 30 -- “CLOUT” (“Case Law on UNCITRAL Texts”), 31 a collection of abstracts of court 

23 Franco Ferrari, Art. 7, EINHEITLICHES UN-KAUFRECHT 126 (Peter Schlechtriem ed., Munich 2000). 

24 See Cook, supra note 8, at 226; V. Susanne Cook, The U.N. Convention on Contracts for the 

International Sale of Goods: A Mandate to Abandon Legal Ethnocentricity, 16 J.L. and COM. 257, 261 

(1997); Joanne M. Darkey, A U.S. Court's Interpretation of Damage Provisions under the U.N. Convention 

on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods: A Preliminary Step towards an International 

Jurisprudence of CISG or a Missed Opportunity?, 15 J.L. andCOM. 139, 142 (1995); Helen E. Hartnell, 

Rousing the Sleeping Dog: The Validity Exception to the Convention on Contracts for the International Sale 

of Goods, 18 YALE J. INT'L L. 1, 7 (1993); JOHN O. HONNOLD, UNIFORM LAW FOR INTERNATIONAL 

SALES 95 ff. (The Hague, 1999); ALBERT H. KRITZER, GUIDE TO PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS OF THE 

UNITED NATIONS CONVENTION ON CONTRACTS FOR THE INTERNATIONAL SALE OF GOODS 109 

(Deventer, 1989); Elizabeth H. Patterson, United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International 

Sale of Goods: Unification and the Tension Between Compromise and Domination, 22 STAN. J. INT'L L. 

263, 283 (1986); Peter Winship, Changing Contract Practices in the Light of the United Nations Sales 

Convention: A Guide for Practitioners, 29 INT'L LAW. 525, 528 (1995). 

25 MICHAEL J. BONELL, Art. 7, COMMENTARY ON THE INTERNATIONAL SALES LAW (a cura di 

Cesare Massimo Bianca e Michael J. Bonell, Milano 1987); ENDERLEIN ET AL., supra note 17, at 62; 

FRANCO FERRARI, VENDITA INTERNAZIONALE DI BENI MOBILI. AMBITO DI APPLICAZIONE. 

DISPOSIZIONI GENERALI 138 (Bologna, 1994); ROLF HERBER and BEATE CZERWENKA, 

INTERNATIONALES KAUFRECHT 48 (Munich, 1991); MAGNUS, Währungsfragen, cit., 123; DIETRICH 

MASKOW, THE CONVENTION ON THE INTERNATIONAL SALE OF GOODS FROM THE PERSPECTIVE 

OF THE SOCIALIST COUNTRIES, in LA VENDITA INTERNAZIONALE 54 (Milan 1981); BURGHARD 

PILTZ, INTERNATIONALES KAUFRECHT 66 (Munich 1993); MAGNUS, supra note 13, at 155. 

26 Ferrari, supra note 8, at 831-832. 

27 See generally Franco Ferrari, CISG Case Law: A New Challenge for Interpreters?, 17 J.L. and COM. 

245 (1998). 

28 This appears to be a problem above all for U.S. judges; indeed, various U.S. court decisions expressly 

refer to the “lack of case law” concerning the CISG at a time when there were already many foreign CISG 

cases, Helen Kaminski PTY LTD. v. Mktg. Australian Prod., Inc., Nos. M-47 (DLC), 96846514, 97-8072A, 

at *3 (S.D.N.Y. July 23, 1997). 

29 Rolf Herber, CLOUT, Unilex and andere Veröffentlichungen zum internationalen Kaufrecht, RECHT DER 

INTERNATIONALEN WIRTSCHAFT 502 ( 1995). 

30 Report of the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law on the Work of its Twenty-First 

Session, 11-22 April 1988, YB XIX 98 (1988). 

31 This collection of abstracts can also be found on the internet, available at ‹http://www.uncitral.org›. 



decisions from all over the world dealing with UNCITRAL texts, among others the CISG. 32 

Additionally, the Centre for Comparative and Foreign Law Studies in Rome has developed 

UNILEX, a collection of case law and an international bibliography on the CISG, 33 which 

aims at promoting the knowledge of foreign case law. 34 Finally, various universities have 

created web sites on the Internet where, at no cost, foreign court decisions, especially 

French, 35 German 36 and American ones 37 can be retrieved. 

One must wonder, however, whether the knowledge of foreign case law is sufficient to solve 11 

all the substantive issues. In my opinion, it cannot. 38 The knowledge of foreign case law is 

not per se sufficient to guarantee uniformity, [page 229] as the knowledge of domestic case 

law does not avoid all interpretative problems within a particular legal jurisdiction. If the 

knowledge of foreign case law were sufficient to create uniformity in the CISG's application, 

this would mean, if taken to an extreme, that the first position taken on a specific issue by 

any court would be the one shaping all the successive case law. This can hardly be true, 

especially since foreign case law has, according to the majority view, merely persuasive 

value. 39 

III. Uniform Interpretation and Application of the CISG by Courts Prior to the 12 

Decision of the Tribunale di Vigevano 

It goes without saying that courts, too, are obliged to have regard to the CISG's inter- 13 

national character in interpreting it. Some courts have indeed referred to this obligation. 

For instance, a Swiss court decision states that in interpreting the CISG “one has to have 

particular regard to its international character (Article 7(1)). The starting point of any interpretation 

must be the Convention itself not domestic law.” 40 One Italian tribunal also has 

mentioned the need to take into account the CISG's international character in interpreting 

32 See also Ferrari, supra note 8, at 813. 

33 Fabio Liguori, UNILEX: A Means to Promote Uniformity in the Application of CISG, ZEITSCHRIFT FÜR 

EUROPÄISCHES PRIVATRECHT 600 (1996) (commenting on the database). 

34 Herber, supra note 29, at 502. 

35 CISG France at ‹http://www.jura.uni.sb.de/FB/LS/Witz/cisg.htm› 

36 CISG Online at ‹http://www.jura.uni-freiburg.de/ipr1/cisg› 

37 Institute of International Commercial Law of Pace University School of Law, at 

‹http://cisgw3.1aw.pace.edu› Albert H. Kritzer, The Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of 

Goods: Scope, Interpretation and Resources, 1995 REVIEW OF THE CONVENTION ON CONTRACTS 

FOR THE INTERNATIONAL SALE OF GOODS 147 (1995). 

38 Franco Ferrari, Brevi considerazioni critiche in materia di interpretazione autonoma ed applicazione 

uniforme della Convenzione di Vienna, RIV. DIR. CIV. vol. 2 1998, at 93. 

39 See generally Franco Ferrari, La jurisprudence sur la CVIM: un nouveau defi pour les interpretes?, 

REVUE DE DROIT DES AFFAIRES INTERNATIONALES 495, 503 (1998); Emst A. Kramer, Uniforme 

Interpretation von Einheitsprivatrecht-mit besonderer Berücksichtigung von Art. 7 UNKR, 

ÖSTERREICHISCHE JURISTISCHE BLÄTTER 143, 146 (1996); Melis, supra note 9, at 88; Magnus, 

Währungsfragen, supra note 6, at 123. 

40 Gerichtspräsident Laufen, May 7, 1993, UNILEX. 



it. 41 A similar view was taken by a German court decision, which emphasized the need to 

have regard to the Convention's international character. 42 Reference to the need to avoid 

interpreting the CISG in the light of domestic law can be found in some U.S. cases as well. 

In one case, the court stated that “although the CISG is similar to the UCC with respect to 

certain provisions, [...] it would be inappropriate to apply the UCC case law in construing 

contracts under the CISG.” 43 A very similar statement was recently made by [page 230] the 

German Supreme Court in respect to the possibility to apply German case law regarding 

the Commercial Code to the CISG. 44 

It must be pointed out, however, that the courts are not only bound to interpret the CISG 14 

“autonomously;” they are also obliged to have regard to the need to promote uniformity in 

the Convention's application by taking foreign case law into account. Nevertheless, only 

a few court decisions have, to date, referred to foreign case law. 45 In one Italian case 46 

two foreign court decisions were referred to analytically, one German 47 and one Swiss, 48 

in order to decide whether a notice of non-conformity given to the seller twenty-three days 

after delivery of sporting clothes that turned out to be larger than was agreed upon was 

timely. This issue was also dealt with by a more recent Italian court decision, 49 in which 

the court analyzed a Swiss court decision. 50 In another case, a French court 51 quoted a 

German court decision 52 without, however, examining it at all. 

IV. The Importance of the Decision of the Tribunale di Vigevano 15 

If one takes into account what has just been said, the importance of the decision of the 16 

Tribunale di Vigevano, Italy is self-evident. When dealing with some of the typical issues 

raised by the CISG, such as party autonomy, notice of non-conformity and burden of proof, 

41 Tribunale di Pavia, December 29, 1999, CORRIERE GIURIDICO 932 (2000); Franco Ferrari, Rapporto 

tra diritto materia le uniforme di origine convenzionale e diritto internazionale privato, CORRIERE 

GIURIDICO 933 (2000) (commenting on this decision). 

42 OLGFrankfurt, Apri1 20, 1994, RECHT DER INTERNATIONALEN WIRTSCHAFT 595 (1994). 

43 Claudia v. Olivieri Footwear Ltd., No. 96 Civ. 8052 (HB) (THK) 1998 WL 164824, at *4 (Apr. 7, 1998); for 

similar affirmations, see also Delchi Carrier S.p.A. v. Rotorex Corp., 71 F.3d 1024, 1028 (2d Cir. 1995) 

(stating that “UCC case law is not per se applicable”); Orbisphere Corp. v. United States, 726 F. Supp. 

1344, 1355 (Ct. lnt'l Trade 1989) (stating the same). 

44 BGH, April 3, 1996, JURISTEN ZEITUNG 35 (1997). 

45 See generally Ferrari, supra note 39, at 495. 

46 Tribunale di Cuneo, January 31, 1996, UNILEX. 

47 LG Stuttgart, August 31, 1989, PRAXIS DES INTERNATIONALEN PRIVAT- UND 

VERFAHRENSRECHTS 317 (1990). 

48 Pretura Locarno-Campagna, April 27, 1992, UNILEX. 

49 Tribunale di Pavia, December 29, 1999, supra note 41. 

50 Pretura Locarno-Campagna, December 16, 1991, SCHWEIZERISCHE ZEITSCHRIFT FÜR 

EUROPÄISCHES UND INTERNATIONALES RECHT 665 (1993). 

51 Cour d'appe1 Grenoble, October 23, 1996, UNILEX. 

52 OLG Düsseldorf, July 2, 1992, RECHT DER INTERNATIONALEN WIRTSCHAFT 45 (1993). 



the court referred to about 40 foreign court decisions and arbitral awards. 53 The court has, 

in other words, more than any other court before it, taken into account the need to have 

regard to foreign case law in order to promote uniformity. It has done so, however, with 

the awareness that foreign case law is not binding. This is evident from the decision itself. 

Indeed, the court expressly states that foreign case law, “albeit non-binding, as suggested 

by a few legal writers, must nevertheless be taken into account in order to guarantee and 

promote a uniform application of [page 231] the Vienna Sales Convention.” 54 The court 

correctly rejected the minority view, 55 which attributes binding force to foreign case law 

and which even asks for the creation of a “supranational stare decisis.” 56 As far as the 

suggestion to create a “supranational stare decisis” is concerned, it does not take into 

account the rigid hierarchical structure of the court system which the stare decisis doctrine 

presupposes and which on an international level is lacking. 57 

The decision of the Tribunale di Vigevano is, however, noteworthy not only because of the 17 

large number of foreign cases quoted and the statement that foreign case law merely has 

persuasive value, but also because the court quoted, apart from decisions published in law 

reviews, decisions published in the UNILEX database as well as in two of the aforementioned 

online databases. 58 

V. Exclusion of the CISG 18 

One of the issues touched upon by the court relates to the parties' possibility to exclude the 19 

CISG, 59 which led several authors to label the CISG as a “dispositive” convention. 60 After 

53 In its decision, the court referred to court decisions from Austria, France, Germany, the Netherlands, 

Switzerland and the United States. 

54 Tribunale di Pavia, December 29, 1999, supra note 41, at 933 (expressly stating that “foreign case law 

merely has persuasive value.”). 

55 Cf. SCHLECHTRIEM, supra note 13, at 29-30; MAGNUS, supra note 13, at 21. Albeit with reference to 

the UNIDROIT Convention on International Factoring, see also FRANCO FERRARI, IL FACTORING 

INTERNAZIONALE 115 (Padova, 1999). 

56 Larry A. Dimatteo, An International Contract Law Formula: The Informality of International Business 

Transactions Plus the Internationalization of Contract Law Equals Unexpected Contractual Liability, 23 

SYRACUSE J. INT'L L. and COM. 67, 78-79 (1997); Larry A. Dimatteo, The CISG and the Presumption of 

Enforceability: Unintended Contractual Liability in International Business Dealings, 22 YALE INT'L L.J. 111, 

133 (1997). 

57 See also Ferrari, supra note 23, at 128. 

58 Supra notes 33-37 

59 For papers on the exclusion of the CISG, see Rüdiger Holthausen, Vertraglicher Ausschluß des 

UN-Übereinkommens über internationale Warenkaufvertäge, RECHT DER INTERNATIONALEN 

WIRTSCHAFT 513 (1989); Claude Witz, L'exclusion de la Convention des Nations unies sur les contrats 

de vente internationale de marchandises par la volonte des parties (Convention de Vienne du 11 avril 

1980), DALLOZ CHRONIQUE 107 (1990). 

60 Many legal writers have referred to the CISG's “dispositive nature”; see, for instance, 

WILHELM-ALBRECHT ACHILLES, KOMMENTAR ZUM UN-KAUFRECHTS ÜBEREINKOMMEN (CISG) 



having stated that the CISG does apply [page 232] to the case at hand by virtue of Article 

1(1)(a), the court expressly stated that the parties had not taken advantage of the possibility 

of excluding the CISG. Unlike other courts, the Tribunale di Vigevano did not, however, limit 

itself to emphasizing the fact that the parties had not excluded the CISG. Rather, it grasped 

that occasion to deal in more detail with the issue of implicit exclusion which it, like many 61 

-- albeit not all 62 -- courts and legal writers 63 considered admissible. 

In its decision, the court mainly deals with the (rather practical) issue of whether the CISG 20 

must be considered as having been excluded where the parties pleaded on the sole basis 

of a particular domestic law (in the case at hand, Italian law) despite the fact that all of 

the CISG's criteria of applicability were met. The court correctly stated that the mere fact 

that the parties argue on the sole basis of a domestic law must not necessarily be taken 

25 (Neuwied, 2000); Sergio Carbone, L'ambito di applicazione ed i criteri interpretativi della Convenzione di 

Vienna sulla vendita internazionale, in LA VENDITA INTERNAZIONALE 61, 78 (Milan 1981); FRANCO 

FERRARI, LA VENDITA INTERNAZIONALE. APPLICABILITA ED APPLICAZIONI DELLA CONVENZIONE 

DI VIENNA DEL 1980, 158 (Padova 1997); JOCHEN LINDBACH, RECHTSWAHL IM EINHEITSRECHT 

AM BEISPIEL DES WIENER UN-KAUFRECHTS 67 (Aachen 1996); Paul Volken, Das Wiener 

Übereinkommen über den internationalen Warenkauf. Anwendungsvorausetzungen und 

Anwendungsbereich, in EINHEITLICHES KAUFRECHT UND NATIONALES OBLIGATIONENRECHT 92 

(Peter Schlechtriem ed., Baden-Baden 1987). 

61 See also OLGMünchen, 9 September 1997, FORUM FÜR INTERNATIONALES RECHT 159 (1997); LG 

München, 29 May 1995, NEUE JURISTISCHE WOCHENSCHRIFT 401 (1996). 

62 LG Landshut, 5 April 1995, UNILEX; Orbisphere Corp. v. United States, 726 F. Supp. 1344, 1355 n.7 

(Ct. Int'l Trade 1989). 

63 See also BERNARD AUDIT, LA VENTE INTERNATIONALE DE MARCHANDISES 38 (Paris 1990); 

Kevin Bell, The Sphere of Application of the Vienna Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of 

Goods, 8 PACE INT'L L.J. 237, 255 (1996); Jacopo Cappuccio, La deroga implicta nella convenzione di 

Vienna de1 1980, Diritto del commercio internazionale 867, 868-869 (1994); Calvo Caravaca, Art. 6, in LA 

COMPRA VENT A INTERNACIONAL DE MERCADERIAS 94 (Luis Diez-Picazo ed., Madrid 1998); Sergio 

Carbone e Riccardo Luzzatto, I contratti del commercio internazionale, in 11 TRATTATO DI DIRITTO 

PRIVATO 132 (Pietro Rescigno ed., Torino 1984); BEATE CZERWENKA, 

RECHTSANWENDUNGSPROBLEME IM INTERNATIONALEN KAUFRECHT. DAS KOLLISIONSRECHT 

BEI GRENZÜBERSCHREITENDEN KAUFVERTRÄGEN UND DER ANWENDUNGSBEREICH DER 

INTERNATIONALEN KAUFRECHTSÜBEREINKOMMEN 170 (Berlin 1988); Samuel K. Date-Bah, The 

United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods. 1980: Overview and Selective 

Commentary, REVIEW OF GHANA LAW 50, 54 (1979); Franco Ferrari, Art. 6, KOMMENTAR ZUM 

EINHEITLICHEN UN-KAUFRECHT, supra note 23, at 113-114; ALEJANDRO GARRO E ALBERTO L. 

ZUPPI, COMPRAVENTA INTERNACIONAL DE MERCADERIAS 98 (Buenos Aires 1990); HOLTHAUSEN, 

supra note 59, at 515; KAROLLUS, supra note 10, at 38; Nicole Lacasse, Le champ d'application de la 

Convention des Nations Unies sur les contrats de vente internationale de marchandises, in ACTES DU 

COLLOQUE SUR LA VENTE INTERNATIONALE 37 (Louis Perret and Nicole Lacasse eds., Montreal 

1989); Fabio Liguori, La Convenzione di Vienna sulla vendita internazionale di beni mobili nella pratica: 

un'analisi critica delle prime cento decisioni, 4 FORO ITALIANO 145, 158 (1996); LINDBACH, supra note 

60, at 253; Barry Nicholas, The Vienna Convention on International Sales Law, 105 L.Q.R. 201, 208 

(1989); PETER SCHLECHTRIEM, EINHEITLICHES UN-KAUFRECHT 21 (Tübingen 1981); Kurt Siehr, Art. 

6, in KOMMENTAR ZUM UN-KAUFRECHT, supra note 23, at 81-82; Witz, supra note 59, at 108 



to mean that they have excluded the CISG. 64 Indeed, in order for it to have the effect of 

excluding the CISG, the parties must have been aware of its applicability in the first place. 

If they were not aware of the CISG's applicability, the courts will have to apply the CISG. 

Nowadays, this appears [page 233] to be the prevailing view in legal writing 65 -- as well 

as in case law. A German court, 66 for instance, adopted this view when it stated that the 

parties arguing on the sole basis of a domestic law may be regarded as having excluded 

the CISG when “it results that their pleadings correspond to an agreement of the parties 

to exclude the Convention.” 67 If the “behavior during the proceedings is not based upon 

a conscious choice of a domestic sales law, but rather on the erroneous opinion that this 

law would anyway be applicable,” 68 the CISG would have to be applied by virtue of the 

principle iura novit curia, as expressly stated by the Tribunale di Vigevano. 

VI. Timely Notice of Non-Conformity 21 

After having stated that the CISG was applicable, the court dealt with the issue of non- 22 

conformity. Specifically, with the issue of whether the buyer had lost its right to rely on the 

lack of conformity due to an inadequate notice. 

As pointed out by the Tribunale di Vigevano, a notice is inadequate when it is not made 23 

within a reasonable period of time after the non-conformity was or should have been discovered. 

The starting point of the court's discussion of the timeliness of the notice is the statement 

that the reference to the “reasonable time” must be considered a “general clause” 69 

which obliges the courts to give regard to all the circumstances of a specific case. 70 One 

such circumstance is the nature of the goods, as expressly stated by the Tribunale di 

Vigevano, quoting prior decisions by a German court 71 and a Dutch court. 72 Thus, where 

the goods are perishable, the notice of non-conformity must be [page 234] given within 

64 Ferrari, supra note 63, at 116-117. 

65 Peter Schlechtriem, Aufrechnung durch den Käufer wegen Nachbesserungsaufwand-deutsches 

Vertragsstatut und UN-Kaufrecht, PRAXIS DES INTERNATIONALEN PRIVAT- UND 

VERFAHRENSRECHTS 256 (1996); see also SIEHR, supra note 63, at 80; Ferrari, supra note 63, at 116; 

Ulrich Magnus, Das UN-Kaufrecht: Fragen und Probleme seiner praktischen Bewährung, ZEITSCHRIFT 

FÜR EUROPÄISCHES PRIVATRECHT 823, 827 (1997); but cf. Eckhard Wolf, Die Rechtsprechung des 

Gerichtshofs zum Kaufrecht, WERTPAPIER-MITTEILUNGEN 41-42 (1998). 

66 See, e.g., for instance, OLG Hamm, 9 June 1995, RECHT DER INTERNATIONALEN WIRTSCHAFT 

689 (1996) (F.R.G.); LG Landshut, 5 April 1995, UNILEX (F.R.G.). 

67 OLG Celle, 24 May 1995, UNILEX. 

68 Id. 

69 See also Pretura Torino, 30 January 1997, UNILEX. 

70 See also Tribunale di Cuneo, 31 January 1996, UNILEX; OLG München, 8 February 1995, published 

online on the CISG website available at ‹http://www.jura.uni.freiburg.de/ipr1/cisg› OLG Düsseldorf, 10 

February 1994, RECHT DER INTERNATIONALEN WIRTSCHAFT 53 (1995) (F.R.G.). 

71 AG Augsburg, 29 January 1996, UNILEX. 

72 RB Roermond, 19 December 1991, NEDERLANDS INTERNATIONAAL PRIVAATRECHT n.159 (1992). 



a shorter period of time than that within which notice concerning durable, non-perishable 

goods must be given. 73 

The court also stated that, among the circumstances to be taken into account, one must 24 

consider party autonomy. Because the CISG provisions dealing with the issue of conformity 

(Articles 35-44) are not mandatory" 74 the parties may freely agree upon a period 

of time within which the notice has to be given. 75 Thus, in the case at hand, the parties 

had not agreed upon a specific period of time, nor were the goods perishable, the court 

rightly stated that it could measure the timeliness of the notice more liberally. Nevertheless, 

because in the case at hand notice was given four months after the defects had been 

discovered, the notice could not be considered timely. 76 In order to reinforce this conclusion, 

the Tribunale di Vigevano referred to several foreign court decisions according to 

which a notice given three, 77 or even two months 78 after the discovery of the defects must 

be considered late. 79 

VII. Specificity of the Notice of Non-Conformity 25 

In order to preserve the right to rely on the lack of conformity, it is not sufficient, however, 26 

that the buyer notifies the seller in time. According to CISG Article 39(1), the notice must 

also have specific content. It does not, however, have to have a specific form, as expressly 

stated by the Tribunale di Vigevano. 80 This specificity requirement was introduced in order 

to give the [page 235] seller the opportunity to decide how to react to the buyer's claim (by 

73 See also RB Zwolle, 5 March 1997, UNILEX, as well as AG Kehl, 6 October 1995, NEUE JURISTISCHE 

WOCHENSCHRIFT RECHTSPRECHUNGS-REPORT 565 (1996), quoted by the Tribunale di Vigevano in 

its decision. 

74 FERRARI, supra note 60, at 211; PILTZ, supra note 24, at 193-94; Ingeborg Schwenzer, supra note 23, 

at 420; Martin Welser, Die Vertragsverletzung des Verkäufers und die Folgen ihrer Verletzung, in DAS 

UNCITRAL-KAUFRECHT IM VERGLEICH ZUM ÖSTERREICHISCHEN RECHT 113 (Peter Doralt ed., 

Vienna 1985). 

75 See also LG Gießen, 5 July 1994, NEUE JURISTISCHE WOCHENSCHRIFT 438 (1995), quoted by 

Tribunale di Vigevano. 

76 In its decision, the Tribunale di Vigevano pointed out, that on a previous occasion the Dutch Supreme 

Court had stated that a notice given 4 months after the discovery of the defects must be considered late; 

Hoge Raad, 20 February 1998, NEDERLANDS JURISTENBLAD 566 (1998). 

77 RB Roermond, 6 May 1994, UNILEX. 

78 OLG Düsseldorf, 12 March 1993, UNILEX. 

79 See, e.g., Camilla Baasch Andersen, Reasonable Time in Article 39(1) of the CISG - Is Article 39(1) truly 

a Uniform Provision?, REVIEW OF THE CISG 63 ff. (1998); Ulrich Magnus, Die Rügeobliegenheit des 

Käufers im UN-Kaufrecht, TRANSPORTRECHT-INTERNATIONALES HANDELSRECHT 29 ff. (1999); 

Anna Veneziano, Non-conformite des marchandises dans les ventes intemationales: etude de la 

jurisprudence atctuelle sur la CVIM, REVUE DE DROIT DES AFFAIRES INTERNATIONALES 39ff. (1997). 

80 The notice of non-conformity does not have to meet any form requirements; it can even be given via 

telephone, as expressly pointed out by the Tribunale di Vigevano, which also quotes a German court 

decision which had stated the same on a previous occasion; LG Frankfurt, 9 December 1992, NEUE 

JURISTISCHE WOCHENSCHRIFT RECHTSPRECHUNGS-REPORT 325 (1993). 



examining the goods himself, by repairing the goods, or by delivering substitute goods). 81 

In the case at hand, the court correctly stated that the notice was not specific enough. Although 

one should not overemphasize this requirement, 82 a notice that merely refers to the 

fact that “the goods caused problems” cannot be considered a proper notice. Indeed, such 

a generic notice (not unlike similar ones where reference is solely made to the fact that the 

goods are “defective in all parts,” 83 that they “do not conform to contract specifications” 84 

or that they are the outcome of “poor workmanship,” 85 etc.) 86 does not put the seller in a 

position to choose what steps to take. 

What has been said in the last two chapters would without any doubt by itself suffice to 27 

deny the buyer the right to rely on the lack of conformity, especially since, as pointed out 

by the Tribunale di Vigevano, the buyer can rely neither on Article 40 (according to which 

the lack of proper notice is of no consequence where the seller was aware, or could not 

have been unaware, of the lack of conformity and did not notify the buyer), nor on Article 

44 (according to which the buyer retains at least some rights if he has a reasonable excuse 

for not giving proper notice). Both are intended to limit the harshness of the consequences 

of a lack of proper notice. The court also dismissed the buyer's claim for another reason, 

linked to the burden of proof. 

VIII. Burden of Proof Under the CISG 28 

There is a dispute among legal scholars as to whether the issue of burden of proof is 29 

a matter governed by the CISG. 87 According to several legal [page 236] scholars, this 

issue is not dealt with by the Convention which is -- why one should -- apart from some 

81 See also Schwenzer, supra note 23, at 411-412. 

82 See also Reinhard Resch, Zur Rage bei Sachmängeln nach UN-Kaufrecht,ÖSTERREICHISCHE 

JURISTENZEITUNG 470, 470 (1992). 

83 OLG Frankfurt, 20 April 1994, NEUE JURISTISCHE WOCHENSCHRIFT 1013 (1994). 

84 HG Zürich, 30 November 1998, SCHWEIZERISCHE ZEITSCHRIFT FÜR INTERNATIONALES UND 

EUROPÄISCHES RECHT 188 (1999). 

85 LG München, 3 July 1989, PRAXIS DES INTERNATIONALEN PRIVAT-UND VERFAHRENSRECHTS 

316 (1990). 

86 See, e.g., Burghard Piltz, Neue Entwicklungen im UN-Kaufrecht, NEUE JURISTISCHE 

WOCHENSCHRIFT 553, 557 (2000). 

87 Several monographs have been written on the subject of burden of proof; see, e.g. CLEMENS 

ANTWEILER, BEWEISLASTVERTEILUNG IM UN-KAUFRECHT; INSBESONDERE BEI 

VERTRAGSVERLETZUNGEN DES VERKÄUFERS (Frankfurt 1995); MICHAEL HENNIGER, DIE FRAGE 

DER BEWEISLAST IM RAHMEN DES UN-KAUFRECHTS: ZUGLEICH EINE RECHTSVERGLEICHENDE 

GRUNDLAGENSTUDIE ZUR BEWEISLAST (Munich 1995; ALEXANDER IMBERG, DIE VERTEILUNG 

DER BEWEISLAST BEIM GEFAHRÜBERGANG NACH UN-KAUFRECHT (Frankfurt 1998); REINHARD 

JUNG, DIE BEWEISLASTVERTEILUNG IM UN-KAUFRECHT (Frankfurt 1996); BIRGIT 

REIMER-ZOCHER, BEWEISLASTFRAGEN IM HAAGER UND WIENER KAUFRECHT (Frankfurt 1995). 



exceptional cases 88 - have recourse to domestic law. 89 This point of view also has been 

taken up by a number of courts. 90 There is, however, no agreement among these legal 

writers as to how to determine the applicable domestic law. Whereas some legal writers 

hold the view that one should always resort to the lex fori, 91 others propose to resort to 

the domestic law made applicable by virtue of the rules of private international law of the 

forum. 92 

The prevailing view, however, appears to be that the issue of burden of proof is a matter 30 

governed by the CISG 93 (at least “implicitly” 94 or “indirectly” 95 ). This view has been justified, 

on the one hand, on the grounds that the CISG itself provides at least one rule on 

the allocation of the burden [page 237] of proof, 96 namely the one to be found in Article 

79(1). 97 Thus, it cannot be asserted that the issue of the allocation of the burden of proof 

is not governed by the CISG. On the other hand, legal scholars have pointed out that the 

issue of burden of proof is so closely linked to the substantive law that a rule on the allocation 

of the burden of proof must necessarily be derived from the substantive law, i.e. the 

88 See, e.g., MAX HUTTER, DIE HAFTUNG DES VERKÄUFERS FÜR NICHTLIEFERUNG DER WARE 

BZW. LIEFERUNG VERTRAGSWIDRIGER WARE NACH DEM WIENER UNCITRAL-ÜBEREINKOMMEN 

ÜBER INTERNATIONALE WARENKAUFVERTRÄGE VOM 11 April 1980 44 (Diss. Regensburg 1988). 

89 Warren L.H. Khoo, Art. 2, in COMMENTARY ON THE INTERNATIONAL SALES LAW, supra note 25, at 

39; Ulrich Huber, Der UNCITRAL-Entwurf eines Übereinkommens über internationale Warenkaufverträge, 

RABELS ZEITSCHRIFT FÜR AUSLÄNDISCHES UND INTERNATIONALES PRIVATRECHT 413, 479 

(1979); GERT REINHART, UN-KAUFRECHT 89 (Heidelberg 1991); Arthur Rosett, Critical Reflections on 

the United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods, 45 OHIO STATE L.J. 265, 

281 (1984); GRITLI RYFFEL, DIE SCHADENERSATZHAFTUNG DES VERKÄUFERS NACH DEM 

WIENER ÜBEREINKOMMEN ÜBER INTERNATIONALE WARENKAUFVERTRÄGE VOM 11 Apri1 1980 

59 (Bern 1992). 

90 ICC Arbitral Award no. 6653/93, JOURNAL DU DROIT INTERNATIONAL 1044 (1993). 

91 Cf. compare Khoo, supra note 89, at 39; Dirk Ott o , Produkthaftung nach dem UN-Kaufrecht, 

MONATSSCHRIFT FÜR DEUTSCHES RECHT 533, 534 (1992); RYFFEL, supra note 89, at 59. 

92 Cosi Shivbir S. Grewal, Risk of loss in Goods Sold During Transit: A Comparative Study of the United 

Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods, the Uniform Commercial Code, and 

the British Sale of Goods Act, 14 LOY. L.A. INT'L and COMP. L. REV. 93, 102 (1991). 

93 Cf. JOACHIM AUE, MÄNGELGEWÄHRLEISTUNG IM UN-KAUFRECHT 110 (Frankfurt 1989); Cesare 

Massimo Bianca, Art. 36, in COMMENTARY ON THE INTERNATIONAL SALES LAW, supra note 25, at 

287-288; Victor Knap p , Art. 74, in COMMENTARY ON THE INTERNATIONAL SALES LAW, supra note 

25, at 541; Rolf Herber, Anwendungsbereich des UNCITRAL-Kaufrechtsübereinkommens, in DAS 

UNCITRAL-KAUFRECHT IM VERGLEICH ZUM ÖSTERREICHISCHEN RECHT, supra note 74, at 41; 

HERBER and CZERWENKA, supra note 24, at 32; JUNG, supra note 87, at 40; Ulrich Magnus, Stand und 

Entwicklung des UN-Kaufrechts, ZEITSCHRIFT FÜR EUROPÄISCHES PRIVATRECHT 202, 207 (1995); 

REIMERS-ZOCHER, supra note 87, at 148. 

94 HG Zürich, 9 September 1993, UNILEX. 

95 Oskar Hartwieg, Prozessuale Aspekte einheitlicher Anwendung der Wiener UN-Konvention über den 

Internationalen Warenkauf (CISG). Eine komparative Fall-Studie zur einheitlichen Rechtsanwendung, 

ZEITSCHRIFT FÜR VERGLEICHENDE RECHTSWISSENSCHAFT 282, 321 (1993). 

96 MAGNUS, supra note 13, at 122. 

97 See also REIMERS-ZOCHER, supra note 87, at 146 ff. 



CISG. 98 

If one agrees with the view that the issue is dealt with by the CISG, 99 one still has to 31 

decide how the burden of proof must be allocated in practice. A close examination of both 

the legislative history of the various provisions, as well as their wording, 100 has led legal 

scholars 101 to elaborate the general principle that each party has to prove the existence of 

the factual prerequisites contained in the provision from which it wants to derive beneficial 

legal consequence. 102 The Tribunale di Vigevano as well has evinced this principle from 

the CISG, as have other courts cited by the Tribunale di Vigevano; 103 indeed, according 

to the Tribunale di Vigevano, “ei incumbit probatio, qui dicit, non qui negat.” 104 As pointed 

out by the Tribunale di Vigevano itself, this principle leads to another conclusion as well: 

a party claiming an exception has the burden of proving the factual prerequisites of that 

exception. 105 

Once the Tribunale di Vigevano had stated the general principle, it provided some exam- 32 

ples of how the burden of proof must be allocated in practice. It stated, for instance, that 

the party claiming that the internationality of the contract was not apparent, which would 

lead to the CISG's inapplicability by virtue of Article 1(2), has to prove this. The court also 

stated that the aforementioned general principle obliges the party claiming that the CISG's 

applicability had been excluded by the parties to prove the existence of such an agreement 

between the parties. As far as the issue of [page 238] damages is concerned, the 

aforementioned principle leads, according to the Tribunale di Vigevano as well as a Swiss 

court, 106 cited by the Italian court, to the damaged party having to prove the damage, the 

breach of contract, the causal link between the breach of contract and the damage, as well 

as the foreseeability of the loss. 

From this general principle another rule can be derived: the buyer who asserts the non- 33 

conformity of the goods must prove the lack of conformity as well as the existence of a 

proper notice. 107 Because in the case at hand the buyer did not prove that lack of con- 

98 See also JUNG, supra note 87, at 38 and 40; Hartwieg, supra note 95, at 288-89. 

99 Several courts stated that the issue of burden of proof is a matter governed by the CISG; see, e.g., HG 

Zürich, 26 April 1995, UNILEX; HG Zürich, 9 September 1993, UNILEX. 

100 See, e.g., JUNG, supra note 87, at 52 ff. 

101 JUNG, supra note 87, at 52 ff.; MAGNUS, supra note 13, at 123. 

102 MAGNUS, supra note 13, at 123, where the author states that this principle is clearly based upon Article 

79(1); for a reference on the importance of Article 79(1) in establishing a general principle concerning the 

allocation of the burden of proof, see REIMERS-ZOCHER, supra note 87, at 146 ff. 

103 Cf. LG Frankfurt, 6 July 1994, UNILEX; OG Innsbruck, 1 July 1994, UNILEX. 

104 JUNG, supra note 87, at 44; Magnus, supra note 93, at 207. 

105 Franco Ferrari, Art. 4, in KOMMENTAR ZUM EINHEITLICHEN UN-KAUFRECHT, supra note 23, at 104; 

MAGNUS, supra note 13, at 123. 

106 HG Zürich, 26 April 1995, UNILEX. 

107 See also HG Zürich, 30 November 1998, SCHWEIZERISCHE ZEITSCHRIFT FÜR INTERNATIONALES 

UND EUROPÄISCHES RECHT 185 (1999); HG Zürich, 26 Apri11995, supra note 106; OLG Innsbruck, 1 

July 1994, UNILEX, to which the Tribunale di Vigevano espress1y refers in its decision. 



formity, the Tribunale di Vigevano could have rejected the plaintiff's claim for this reason 

alone. 

IX. Conclusion 34 

The conclusions which can be drawn from reading the decision of the Tribunale di Vigevano 35 

are obvious. Recourse to foreign court decisions in interpreting and applying the CISG 

which legal scholars have been asking for since the CISG's coming into force is apparently 

possible. It is also obvious, however, that not all the courts (as mentioned earlier) will 

apply the CISG as the Tribunale di Vigevano did. One can only hope that the Tribunale di 

Vigevano will soon have to decide another case dealing with the CISG. [page 239] 



Metadata 

SiSU Metadata, document information 

Document Manifest @: 

‹http://www.jus.uio.no/pace/tribunale_di_vigevano_specific_aspects_of_cisg_dealt_with.franco_ferrari/sisu_manifest. 

html› 

Title: Tribunale di Vigevano: Specific Aspects of the CISG Uniformly Dealt With 

Creator: Franco Ferrari 

Rights: CISG Database, Pace Institute of International Commercial Law. Reproduced with permission of 20 “Journal of Law and Commerce” 

(Spring 2001) 225-239; 

Subject: CISG Article 7 

Publisher: SiSU on behalf of CISG Database, Pace Institute of International Commercial Law 

Date available: 2002-12-12 

Date: 2001 

Version Information 

Sourcefile: tribunale_di_vigevano_specific_aspects_of_cisg_dealt_with.franco_ferrari.sst 

Filetype: SiSU text 2.0 

Source Digest: SHA256(tribunale_di_vigevano_specific_aspects_of_cisg_dealt_with.franco_ferrari.sst)=8fb15346- 

2ddcb69a0ad1ad17ddf781d7fee6582f8028483e1c4dfb8dc8c3cc86 

Skin Digest: SHA256(skin_pace.rb)=60eea9c5c217948f41562100820da948e3f99160a3b7cf5c79f4ab61e0c1773d 

Generated 

Document (dal) last generated: Thu Sep 16 21:11:03 -0400 2010 

Generated by: SiSU 2.6.3 of 2010w30/3 (2010-07-28) 

Ruby version: ruby 1.8.7 (2010-08-16 patchlevel 302) [i486-linux]

PDF, U.S. letter size, portrait/vertical document

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?