MEMORANDUM FOR CLAIMANT

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Rheinische Friedrich-Wilhelms-Universität Bonn III. The CISG is the law applicable to the contract and its formation A. The parties have chosen the commercial law of Equatoriana 16 B. The CISG is the pertinent part of the commercial law of Equatoriana for the contract at issue C. Reference to the “commercial law of Equatoriana” does not amount to an implied exclusion of the CISG IV. A contract of sale was concluded between CLAIMANT and RESPONDENT A. A contract containing all elements of Art. 14 CISG has been concluded during the telephone conversation between Mr. Storck and Mr. Black a. Mr. Storck and Mr. Black concluded a contract during their conversation 19 b. The agreement contained all elements of Art. 14 CISG 20 B. Irrespective of the fact whether there was an agreement on the discount, a contract would still have been validly concluded even if the parties had not fixed the discount a. Since CLAIMANT and RESPONDENT did not conclude the contract by virtue of offer and acceptance, the requirements of Art. 14 CISG were not mandatory for the formation of the contract at issue b. An agreement on the discount was not necessary in order to conclude a valid contract c. The domestic law of Equatoriana has no impact on the validity of the contract 15 16 16 19 19 20 21 21 23 IV
Rheinische Friedrich-Wilhelms-Universität Bonn V. The contract was concluded including a 4% discount 23 A. The agreement the parties reached during their telephone conversation can only be interpreted as including a discount of 4% from CLAIMANT's list price a. The agreement has to be interpreted according to Article 8 CISG 24 b. RESPONDENT could not have been unaware of CLAIMANT's intent to grant only a 4% discount c. Neither Mr. Storck nor any other reasonable person could have been aware of Mr. Black's intent to contract with a discount of 8% from the list price B. If the Tribunal finds that the parties' agreement did not fix the price, a contract has nevertheless been concluded including a 4% discount VI. RESPONDENT was in breach of its obligations under the contract A. RESPONDENT’s fax of 2 May 2001 was an anticipatory breach of contract B. RESPONDENT’s fax was an anticipatory repudiation of the contract concluded on 3 April 2001 C. RESPONDENT was not entitled to refuse performance 28 24 24 25 26 27 27 27 V
Page 1 and 2: On Behalf of TENTH ANNUAL WILLEM C.
Page 3: Rheinische Friedrich-Wilhelms-Unive
Page 7 and 8: Rheinische Friedrich-Wilhelms-Unive
Page 9 and 10: Index of Authorities Rheinische Fri
Page 11 and 12: Derains, Yves / Schwartz, Eric A. D
Page 17 and 18: Witz, Wolfgang / Salger, Hanns Chri
Page 19 and 20: Belgium Rheinische Friedrich-Wilhel
Page 55 and 56:
Rheinische Friedrich-Wilhelms-Unive
Page 57 and 58:
Page 59 and 60:
Page 61:
show all

MEMORANDUM FOR CLAIMANT

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?