国际销售合同的效力:《维也纳销售公约》第4条“效力例外”的无关性及确定公约范围的新方法

Ulrich G. Schroeter
{"title":"国际销售合同的效力:《维也纳销售公约》第4条“效力例外”的无关性及确定公约范围的新方法","authors":"Ulrich G. Schroeter","doi":"10.31228/osf.io/vtbpm","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Throughout the history of uniform law for international sales, the rules governing the validity of cross-border sales contracts have proven particularly difficult to harmonize because they differ greatly between the various domestic laws. This dilemma inter alia resulted in the \"validity exception\" in Article 4 sentence 2(a) of the United Nations Convention for Contracts for the International Sale of Goods of 11 April 1980 (CISG) being adopted as compromise, a provision that supposedly excludes such matters from the scope of the uniform sales law. The present article attempts to demonstrate that this provision in fact provides little assistance in deciding which validity-related matters are governed by the Convention and which are not, and that the \"validity exception\" is therefore in truth irrelevant.It continues by outlining a novel two-step approach to determining the CISG's scope with respect to validity issues. According to this approach, a domestic law rule (pertaining to validity matters or other issues) is displaced by the Convention if (1) it is triggered by a factual situation which the Convention also applies to (the \"factual\" criterion), and (2) it pertains to a matter that is also regulated by the Convention (the \"legal\" criterion). Only if both criteria are cumulatively fulfilled, the domestic law rule concerned overlaps with the Convention’s sphere of application in a way that will generally result in its preemption. In the last part of the article, three issues that may be viewed as concerning the \"validity\" of international sales contracts are discussed, each in turn being viewed through the traditional lenses of Article 4 CISG and the alternative two-step approach. These issues are: Mistakes and their effect upon CISG contracts; Consumer rights of withdrawal; The so-called \"button solution\" under recent e-commerce laws.","PeriodicalId":319905,"journal":{"name":"LSN: Treaties & Other Sources of International Law (Topic)","volume":"21 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2013-08-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Validity of International Sales Contracts: Irrelevance of the 'Validity Exception' in Article 4 Vienna Sales Convention and a Novel Approach to Determining the Convention's Scope\",\"authors\":\"Ulrich G. Schroeter\",\"doi\":\"10.31228/osf.io/vtbpm\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Throughout the history of uniform law for international sales, the rules governing the validity of cross-border sales contracts have proven particularly difficult to harmonize because they differ greatly between the various domestic laws. This dilemma inter alia resulted in the \\\"validity exception\\\" in Article 4 sentence 2(a) of the United Nations Convention for Contracts for the International Sale of Goods of 11 April 1980 (CISG) being adopted as compromise, a provision that supposedly excludes such matters from the scope of the uniform sales law. The present article attempts to demonstrate that this provision in fact provides little assistance in deciding which validity-related matters are governed by the Convention and which are not, and that the \\\"validity exception\\\" is therefore in truth irrelevant.It continues by outlining a novel two-step approach to determining the CISG's scope with respect to validity issues. According to this approach, a domestic law rule (pertaining to validity matters or other issues) is displaced by the Convention if (1) it is triggered by a factual situation which the Convention also applies to (the \\\"factual\\\" criterion), and (2) it pertains to a matter that is also regulated by the Convention (the \\\"legal\\\" criterion). Only if both criteria are cumulatively fulfilled, the domestic law rule concerned overlaps with the Convention’s sphere of application in a way that will generally result in its preemption. In the last part of the article, three issues that may be viewed as concerning the \\\"validity\\\" of international sales contracts are discussed, each in turn being viewed through the traditional lenses of Article 4 CISG and the alternative two-step approach. These issues are: Mistakes and their effect upon CISG contracts; Consumer rights of withdrawal; The so-called \\\"button solution\\\" under recent e-commerce laws.\",\"PeriodicalId\":319905,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"LSN: Treaties & Other Sources of International Law (Topic)\",\"volume\":\"21 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2013-08-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"LSN: Treaties & Other Sources of International Law (Topic)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.31228/osf.io/vtbpm\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"LSN: Treaties & Other Sources of International Law (Topic)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.31228/osf.io/vtbpm","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

摘要

纵观国际销售统一法的历史,关于跨境销售合同效力的规则特别难以协调,因为各国国内法之间差别很大。这一困境除其他外,导致1980年4月11日《联合国国际货物销售合同公约》(《销售公约》)第4条第2(a)句中的“效力例外”被作为折衷办法加以采用,这一规定据称将这类事项排除在统一销售法的范围之外。本条款试图证明,这一规定实际上对决定哪些与效力有关的事项受《公约》管辖而哪些不受其管辖几乎没有帮助,因此,“效力例外”实际上是无关紧要的。它继续概述了确定《销售公约》在有效性问题方面的范围的一种新的两步方法。根据这种方法,国内法规则(关于有效性问题或其他问题)被《公约》取代,如果(1)它是由《公约》也适用的事实情况触发的(“事实”标准),并且(2)它涉及的事项也受《公约》管制(“法律”标准)。只有在两项标准都得到累积满足的情况下,有关的国内法规则才会与《公约》的适用范围重叠,从而通常导致其优先适用。在本条的最后一部分,讨论了可能被视为涉及国际销售合同“效力”的三个问题,并依次从《销售公约》第4条的传统视角和另一种两步法来看待每一个问题。这些问题是:错误及其对《销售公约》合同的影响;消费者撤回权;根据最近的电子商务法律,所谓的“按钮解决方案”。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The Validity of International Sales Contracts: Irrelevance of the 'Validity Exception' in Article 4 Vienna Sales Convention and a Novel Approach to Determining the Convention's Scope
Throughout the history of uniform law for international sales, the rules governing the validity of cross-border sales contracts have proven particularly difficult to harmonize because they differ greatly between the various domestic laws. This dilemma inter alia resulted in the "validity exception" in Article 4 sentence 2(a) of the United Nations Convention for Contracts for the International Sale of Goods of 11 April 1980 (CISG) being adopted as compromise, a provision that supposedly excludes such matters from the scope of the uniform sales law. The present article attempts to demonstrate that this provision in fact provides little assistance in deciding which validity-related matters are governed by the Convention and which are not, and that the "validity exception" is therefore in truth irrelevant.It continues by outlining a novel two-step approach to determining the CISG's scope with respect to validity issues. According to this approach, a domestic law rule (pertaining to validity matters or other issues) is displaced by the Convention if (1) it is triggered by a factual situation which the Convention also applies to (the "factual" criterion), and (2) it pertains to a matter that is also regulated by the Convention (the "legal" criterion). Only if both criteria are cumulatively fulfilled, the domestic law rule concerned overlaps with the Convention’s sphere of application in a way that will generally result in its preemption. In the last part of the article, three issues that may be viewed as concerning the "validity" of international sales contracts are discussed, each in turn being viewed through the traditional lenses of Article 4 CISG and the alternative two-step approach. These issues are: Mistakes and their effect upon CISG contracts; Consumer rights of withdrawal; The so-called "button solution" under recent e-commerce laws.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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