A Canadian seller of wood products sued a US buyer for breach of contract. The defendant contended that the alleged sales contract failed to comply with Uniform Commercial Code Statute of Frauds, since the printed confirmation of order that the plaintiff allegedly sent to the defendant was not sufficient to constitute written confirmation of the prior oral contract in accordance with UCC 2.201(2).
The trial Court dismissed this argument and entered judgment for the seller. The Court of Appeals affirmed with one judge dissenting. According to the dissenting opinion, however, while the seller's confirmation of order did not satisfy Statute of Frauds under the Uniform Commercial Code, if - as might have been the case - CISG were applicable to the sales contract at hand, buyer's statute of frauds defense would have been defeated since Art. 11 CISG does not require a contract to be 'evidenced in writing'. |