A US company (“the buyer”) purchased a paper winder from a German company (“the seller”) for use in its Ohio facility. Upon delivery, the buyer found that winder did not conform to the required specifications, so stopped making partial payments and rejected the machine. The buyer also brought an action against the seller alleging, inter alia, fraudulent inducement and negligent misrepresentation. The seller objected to such claims, arguing they should be dismissed on the ground that CISG “pre-empts” any common law claims made under state law.
Recalling other decisions rendered by US Courts on the matter (see Asante Technologies, Inc. v. PMC-Serra Inc., 27-07-2001; Valero Marketing & Supply Co. v. Greeni Oy, 16-05-2005, Full text and abstract of both decisions in Unilex), the Court agreed with the buyer’s argument that CISG only pre-empts contract claims made under state law and only to the extent that such claims fall within the scope of CISG. Since the Convention does not deal with the legal effects of a seller’s negligent or fraudulent misrepresentation (Art. 4 CISG), the Court found that the buyer was not prevented from pleading such claims. |