MEMORANDUM FOR CLAIMANT

More documents

Recommendations

Info

ARGUMENT ON THE MERITS ............................................................................ 12 II. RESPONDENT FAILED TO DELIVER CONFORMING SQUID IN COMPLIANCE WITH ART. 35 CISG ................................................................................................................... 12 A. RESPONDENT breached the contract in the light of Art. 35(1) CISG ........................................12 i. The contract provided that each squid be between 100 and 150 g ..............................................12 1. In the light of Art. 8(1) CISG, the contract required 100-150 g squid ....................................12 2. In the light of Art. 8(2) CISG, the contract required 100-150 g squid as well .......................13 3. International trade usages of the fishing industry bound RESPONDENT to deliver squid in the 100-150 g range ..............................................................................................................................14 ii. Other phrases in the Order Form and Sale Confirmation cannot be interpreted as having modified said quality requirement ...............................................................................................................14 1. ‗Certified fit for human consumption‘ .........................................................................................15 2. ‗2007/2008 Catch‘ ...........................................................................................................................16 iii. By delivering undersized squid, RESPONDENT failed to supply goods of the quality required by the contract ................................................................................................................................17 B. Alternatively, RESPONDENT failed to abide by Art. 35(2) CISG .................................................17 i. The delivered squid were unfit for the purposes for which goods of the same description are ordinarily used [Art. 35(2)(a) CISG] ...........................................................................................................17 1. The squid could not be used as bait ..............................................................................................17 2. RESPONDENT‘s squid could not be resold .............................................................................18 ii. The squid supplied were unfit for the particular purpose made known to RESPONDENT at the time of the conclusion of the contract [Art. 35(2)(b) CISG] ...........................................................19 1. Particular purpose expressly made known to RESPONDENT .................................................19 2. Particular purpose impliedly made known to RESPONDENT .................................................19 3. RESPONDENT cannot be exempted under Art. 35(2)(b) CISG ..........................................19 iii. The squid did not possess the qualities of the squid RESPONDENT held out to CLAIMANT as a sample [Art. 35(2)(c) CISG] .........................................................................................20 1. The delivered squid lacked a main feature of the squid in the sample ....................................20 2. RESPONDENT contends that the sample and the supplied squid were unsized ...............20 a. CLAIMANT ignored and could not have known that the sample it was shown was of unsized squid .........................................................................................................................................20 b. The fact that the sample was of unsized squid is immaterial to the case ...........................21 III. THE EXAMINATION OF THE SQUID AND THE NOTICE OF NON-CONFORMITY WERE CISG COMPLIANT ............................................................................................................. 21 A. The examination of the squid was made in accordance with Art. 38 CISG ...................................21 i. CLAIMANT examined the squid in accordance with Art. 38(1) CISG ......................................21 ii. Alternatively, the Mediterranean long-liners were swift in inspecting the squid after their reception under Art. 38(3) CISG ................................................................................................................24
B. CLAIMANT notified RESPONDENT of the nature of the lack of conformity within a reasonable time after it was discovered pursuant to Art. 39(1) CISG .......................................................25 C. If the Tribunal is to deem the examination or notification of non-conformity to have been insufficient, RESPONDENT would still be liable for the lack of conformity under Art. 40 CISG ...26 IV. RESPONDENT’S FAILURE TO DELIVER CONFORMING GOODS AMOUNTED TO A FUNDAMENTAL BREACH WHICH ALLOWED CLAIMANT TO AVOID THE CONTRACT UNDER ARTS. 25 AND 49 CISG .......................................................................................... 26 A. RESPONDENT‘s contractual breach was fundamental under Art. 25 CISG ...............................26 i. The squid supplied were not of the required quality ......................................................................27 ii. The squid did not serve their ordinary purpose ..............................................................................27 iii. It was likely for the RESPONDENT to foresee that providing squid below 100-150 g would cause a substantial detriment to CLAIMANT ..........................................................................................28 B. CLAIMANT is entitled to avoid the contract in its entirety according to Art. 51(2) CISG.........28 C. CLAIMANT complied with the obligations imposed by Art. 82 CISG ..........................................28 D. CLAIMANT declared the contract avoided according to Art. 26 CISG.........................................29 E. RESPONDENT cannot be exempted of responsibility under Art. 80 CISG ................................29 V. CLAIMANT TOOK ALL NECESSARY MEASURES TO MITIGATE LOSSES AND IS ENTITLED TO DAMAGES UNDER ART. 45 CISG ................................................................. 30 A. CLAIMANT took all measures that were reasonable to mitigate the losses ..................................30 B. In any case, the burden of the proof of lack of mitigation lies on RESPONDENT, who must provide detailed facts and supporting evidence ............................................................................................32 ARGUMENT ON THE MERITS OF THE COUNTERCLAIM ................................... 32 VI. CLAIMANT IS NOT LIABLE FOR DAMAGES UNDER A CONFIDENTIALITY DUTY ........ 33 A. There was no confidentiality agreement between the parties ............................................................33 i. Substantive provisions of the amended CAM Rules 2010 do not apply when they affect the parties‘ rights ..................................................................................................................................................33 ii. Neither was there an implicit confidentiality agreement when the parties agreed to submit to arbitration ........................................................................................................................................................33 B. Alternatively, if the Tribunal considers that there was a confidentiality agreement between the parties, CLAIMANT made the proceedings public to protect its own rights..........................................34 REQUEST FOR RELIEF ..................................................................................... 35
Page 1 and 2: EIGHTEENTH ANNUAL WILLEM C. VIS INT
Page 3: TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF ABBREVIA
Page 7 and 8: UNIVERSIDAD NACIONAL DE ASUNCIÓN
Page 15 and 16: ITALY UNIVERSIDAD NACIONAL DE ASUNC
Page 51: UNIVERSIDAD NACIONAL DE ASUNCIÓN

MEMORANDUM FOR CLAIMANT

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?