A German buyer ordered a certain amount of truffles from an Italian seller. After delivery, the buyer refused to pay the price, alleging that the truffles arrived softened at its place because of bad refrigeration during transportation. The buyer asserted that it gave notice about the defect via telephone talking to one of the seller's employees, who was not authorized to receive communications but assured it that it would transfer the notice to the seller. Apparently, this never happened. Moreover, the buyer alleged that the truffles got worms due to their softness. However, it never notified the seller about the latter circumstance.
The Court held that the buyer had lost its right to rely on lack of conformity of the goods because it had not sufficiently specified the nature of the defects as required in Art. 39(1) CISG (i.e. the notice about the fact that the truffles got worms due to their softness would have been specific enough).
Moreover, the court without further explanation held that where the notice of non conformity is not given personally to the seller, the buyer must make sure that the notice is actually received by the seller itself. |