Application of the CISG in Dutch Courts

A. Janssen
{"title":"Application of the CISG in Dutch Courts","authors":"A. Janssen","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.1595994","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The CISG has been in force in The Netherlands and Aruba since January 1st, 1992. Since then, Dutch courts have made (and are still making) active use of the CISG, for several reasons: For one, The Netherlands is an important trading nation and hence in a large degree dependent on import and export. This commercial traffic admittedly also results in increased legal disputes. Alongside this economic reason, the great familiarity the Dutch have with international sale of goods law is of crucial significance. This is due on the one hand to the fact that The Netherlands was already a Contracting State in the forerunners to the CISG, the ULF (Uniform Law on the Formation of Contracts for the International Sale of Goods) and the ULIS (Uniform Law on the International Sale of Goods), which were very similar in content, but less successful for political reasons. This meant that the introduction of the CISG did not involve substantial revolution in the international goods trade. On the other hand, the similarity of content between the Burgerlijk Wetboek, the Dutch Civil Code, and the ULF, the ULIS and the CISG must be mentioned. In particular they were an important influence on the creation of the internal Dutch Sale of Goods law, which also came into force on January 1st 1992. Hence, in contrast to many other jurisdictions in Contracting States which only apply the CISG with much hesitation, Dutch courts cannot be said to have a general “fear” of the CISG.The frequency of application, however, provides no indication as to the quality of the decisions. The purpose of this paper is to examine to what extent Dutch case law conforms with the scholarship and case law of other states as well as to what extent it infringes upon the uniform interpretation postulated in accordance with Art. 7 (1) CISG. Knowledge of the “peculiarities” of a foreign - here the Dutch - jurisdiction is not just of great value academically, but also for practitioners concluding sales transactions with The Netherlands.","PeriodicalId":285675,"journal":{"name":"PSN: International Trade Policy (Topic)","volume":"48 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2005-01-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"PSN: International Trade Policy (Topic)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.1595994","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The CISG has been in force in The Netherlands and Aruba since January 1st, 1992. Since then, Dutch courts have made (and are still making) active use of the CISG, for several reasons: For one, The Netherlands is an important trading nation and hence in a large degree dependent on import and export. This commercial traffic admittedly also results in increased legal disputes. Alongside this economic reason, the great familiarity the Dutch have with international sale of goods law is of crucial significance. This is due on the one hand to the fact that The Netherlands was already a Contracting State in the forerunners to the CISG, the ULF (Uniform Law on the Formation of Contracts for the International Sale of Goods) and the ULIS (Uniform Law on the International Sale of Goods), which were very similar in content, but less successful for political reasons. This meant that the introduction of the CISG did not involve substantial revolution in the international goods trade. On the other hand, the similarity of content between the Burgerlijk Wetboek, the Dutch Civil Code, and the ULF, the ULIS and the CISG must be mentioned. In particular they were an important influence on the creation of the internal Dutch Sale of Goods law, which also came into force on January 1st 1992. Hence, in contrast to many other jurisdictions in Contracting States which only apply the CISG with much hesitation, Dutch courts cannot be said to have a general “fear” of the CISG.The frequency of application, however, provides no indication as to the quality of the decisions. The purpose of this paper is to examine to what extent Dutch case law conforms with the scholarship and case law of other states as well as to what extent it infringes upon the uniform interpretation postulated in accordance with Art. 7 (1) CISG. Knowledge of the “peculiarities” of a foreign - here the Dutch - jurisdiction is not just of great value academically, but also for practitioners concluding sales transactions with The Netherlands.
《销售公约》在荷兰法院的适用
《销售公约》自1992年1月1日起在荷兰和阿鲁巴生效。从那时起,荷兰法院已经(并且仍在)积极使用《销售公约》,原因如下:首先,荷兰是一个重要的贸易国,因此在很大程度上依赖进出口。不可否认,这种商业交通也导致了法律纠纷的增加。除了这一经济原因外,荷兰人对国际货物买卖法的熟悉也具有至关重要的意义。这一方面是由于荷兰已经是《销售公约》、《国际货物销售合同订立统一法》和《国际货物销售统一法》的前身的缔约国,这两项法律在内容上非常相似,但由于政治原因不太成功。这意味着,《销售公约》的实施并不涉及国际货物贸易的重大变革。另一方面,必须提到Burgerlijk webook、荷兰民法典、ULF、ULIS和CISG之间内容的相似性。特别是,它们对制定同样于1992年1月1日生效的《荷兰货物销售法》产生了重要影响。因此,与缔约国的许多其他司法管辖区在适用《销售公约》时十分犹豫不同,荷兰法院不能说普遍“害怕”《销售公约》。然而,应用的频率并不能说明决定的质量。本文的目的是考察荷兰判例法在多大程度上符合其他国家的学术和判例法,以及在多大程度上侵犯了根据《销售公约》第7(1)条所假定的统一解释。了解外国(这里指荷兰)司法管辖区的“特殊性”不仅在学术上有很大价值,而且对与荷兰达成销售交易的从业人员也有很大价值。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信