##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.main##

Isabel Cristina Salinas Alcaraz

Resumen

The interpretative methodology applied in Common Law CISG jurisprudence has driven a disparity of reasoning that hinders a uniform application of its provisions. This result is inconsistent with CISG Article 7 which mandates interpretation of the convention in accordance with its international character and the need to promote uniformity. This paper discusses the multiple aspects that have affected the uniform interpretation of CISG norms, including a reference to the case law in USA, Australia and Italy. Finally, the Unidroit principles are presented as an aid to overcome the difficulties in the application of CISG article 7.

##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.details##

Palabras Clave

The United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods (CISG), Common Law, Uniformity of International Trade Law

Referencias
Andersen, C. (2005). The Uniform International Sales Law and the Global Jurisconsultorium. Journal of Law and Commerce.

Bonell, M. (1995). The Unidroit Principles of International Commercial Contracts: Why? What? How? Tulane Law Review 112.

Bonell, M. (2005). An International Restatement of Contract Law: The Unidroit Principles of International Commercial Contracts. (3rd ed).

Bridge, M. (2007). The International Sale of Goods: Law and Practice. (2nd ed).

Brower, Ch., & Jeremy, Sh. (2004). The Creeping Codification of Transnational Commercial Law: An Arbitrator’s Perspective. Virginia Journal of International Law 199.

Cross, K. (2007). Parol Evidence Under the CISG: The “Homeward Trend” Reconsidered. Ohio State Law Journal 133. DiMatteo, L., et al. (n.d.). The Interpretive Turn in International Sales Law: An Analysis of Fifteen Years of CISG Jurisprudence. Available at http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cisg/ biblio/dimatteo3

Ferrari, F. (Ed). (2008). The CISG and Its Impact on National Legal Systems.

Flechtner, H. (1998). The several Texts of the CISG in a Decentralized System: Observations on Translations, Reservations and Other Challenges to the Uniformity Principle in Article, 7(1). Journal of Law & Commerce 187.

Henning, L. (2004). The CISG and Common Law Courts: Is There Really a Problem? WW Law Review 28.

Hofmann, N. (2010). Interpretation Rules and Good Faith as Obstacles to the UK’s Ratification of the CISG and to the Harmonization of Contract Law in Europe. Pace International Law Review 6.

Honnold, J. (1999). Uniform Law for International Sales. (3rd ed). Kilian, M. (2001). CISG and the Problem with Common Law Jurisdictions. Journal of Transnational Law and Policy.

Komarov, A. (2005). Internationality, Uniformity and Observance of Good Faith as Criteria in Interpretation of CISG: Some Remarks on Article, 7(1). Journal of Law & Commerce 75.

Lookofskyk, J. (2005). Walking the Article. Tightrope between CISG and Domestic Law, 7(2). Journal of Law & Commerce.
Cómo citar
Salinas Alcaraz, I. C. (2015). The United Nations convention on contracts for the international sale of goods (cisg) and the Common Law: the challenge of interpreting Article 7. IUSTA, 1(40). https://doi.org/10.15332/s1900-0448.2014.0040.04
Sección
Artículos