A Dutch seller delivered apple trees to a French buyer. As the goods remained unpaid, the seller commenced action asking for payment of the price, interest, and costs of legal action. The latter two claims were grounded on the seller's standard terms, which also contained a choice of law clause in favor of Dutch law. The buyer alleged that the trees were not of the agreed quality. The seller invoked Art. 38 CISG.
The Court held that it was not necessary to determine whether the choice of law clause was valid since, in any case, the contract was governed by CISG (Art. 1(1)(a) and (b) CISG, respectively). In particular, the Court stated that the designation of Dutch law led to the application of CISG, as the law of a contracting State.
The Court adjourned the decision stating that the buyer had not replied to the seller's invocation of Art. 38 and that the buyer had not specified when it had given notice (Art. 39 CISG). |