CLAIMANT 0800 FINAL 12072006

prompted a reasonable party to investigate by accessing the Equalec website [Clar. Q. 24], consulting
with Equalec, knowledgeable suppliers or industry groups, or, at least, by requesting clarification
from Claimant itself.
51. Respondent was bound to observe Equalec’s connection requirements in so far as they were pre-
requisites for Equalec to lock the Fuse Boards. Equalec’s refusal to connect and lock the Fuse
Boards on 8 Sept. 2005 [Statement of Claim 14] shows that the Fuse Policy was such a pre-requisite,
giving independent grounds for Respondent’s breach.
B. The Fuse Boards were not fit for a particular purpose made known to
Respondent.
52. Even if the Fuse Boards were of the quality and description required by the Contract under Art.
35(1) CISG, they were not fit for the particular purpose of connecting Mountain View Office Park
to Equalec’s electrical grid. Goods do not conform to the original contract under Art 35(2)(b) when
they are not “fit for any particular purpose expressly or impliedly made known to the seller at the
time of the conclusion of the contract.” This means that regardless of the express terms of the
Contract, the goods should fulfill any particular purpose communicated to the seller [Schwenzer in
Schlechtriem05 421; Neumayer 278; Bianca in Bianca/Bonell B 275; Marques (Fr.), cited in Lookofsky 93].
However, Art. 35(2)(b) provides an exception where “the circumstances show that the buyer did not
rely, or that it was unreasonable for him to rely, on the seller’s skill and judgement” [see also Bianca in
Bianca/Bonell 274; Schlechtriem in Galston/Smit 6-20; Lookofsky 92; Henschel §m; Helsinki CA (Fin.)].
Claimant expressly or impliedly made known to Respondent the particular purpose of connecting to
Equalec’s electrical grid (1). Claimant relied on Respondent’s skill and judgment (2) and this reliance
was reasonable (3).
1. Claimant made known the particular purpose of connecting to Equalec’s grid.
53. The particular purpose of the Fuse Boards was for them to connect the Mountain View Office Park
to Equalec’s electrical grid. Under Art. 35(2)(b) CISG, the communication of a particular purpose
may be either “express” or “implied” [see also Schlechtriem 280]. Claimant expressly informed
Respondent of this purpose by 4 May 2005 when it sent the Drawings with the Equalec note,
obliging Respondent to deliver Fuse Boards meeting Equalec requirements (see supra 46). Even if
the specification “lockable to Equalec requirements” was not an express communication of the
particular purpose, Claimant impliedly informed Respondent. Respondent, as an experienced
specialist [Answer 2; Re. Ex. 1], knew that the Fuse Boards had no other purpose than to connect to
20