2! Contract!Laws!and!International!Instruments!

Transcription

1 2 ContractLawsandInternationalInstruments 2. Overview 2.1. Introduction 2.2. CISG 2.3. UNIDROIT 2.4. ConcludingThoughts 2.5. EssentialReading LEARNINGOUTCOMES Aftercompletingthislectureandreadingyouwillbeableto: o Explain issues that may arise from the lack of harmonisation across the EU of nationalcontractlawsandunderstandwhytherehasbeennoharmonisationto date; o IdentifysomedifferencesthatoccurinapluralisticlegalunionsuchastheEUin thecontextofcontractlaw; o AppreciatethatthereareEuropeaninstrumentsthatarenotofficiallybindingbut mayoffersolutionstothelackofharmonisation; o Demonstrate a general understanding of some of the common international instruments,theiroperationandlimits. 2.Overview This class places contract law into an EU context, dealing with the issues of Union competences looking at contract law in a comparative way from jurisdictions around the Union. Finally, looking at international influences andinternationalconventionsthatareinfluentialoncommercialagreements. 2.1.Introduction WithintheEU,thereisnocodifiedbodyofcontractlawthatcanbefollowed andappliedacrosstheunion.althoughhistoricallytherehavebeenattempts to do so, most notably through an attempted designing of a uniform Europeancontractlawwhichhasthroughaprocessstemmingfromthe1970s to2003atwhichtimethecommissionpublishedthe PrinciplesofEuropean ContractLaw (PECL)thisisaddressedinlaterlectures.EvensothePECLisa

2 nonybinding instrument that is based on research that compares and evaluates predominant contract laws across the EU. The instrument is howeverusefulinthatitprovidesageneralsetofrulescoveringcontractlaw thepurposeofwhichis toserveasabasisforanyfutureeuropeancodeof Contracts, or at least to provide a possible framework for European draft legislation.z Although there is not a single legal instrument harmonising contact laws across the Union, there are a number of Directives and Regulations that have entered into force that fall squarely into the field of contractlaw.forexample,dealingwithdoorstepselling,commercialagency, contracts negotiated at a distance. Nonetheless, the question of European contract law remains a contentious point with much discussion between the EU and the Member States as to who has the competence in the area of contract law. The topic was reignited in 2001 by a Commission Communication and more recently with the 2010 Green Paper on on policy options for progress towards a European Contract Law for consumers and businesses.thegreenpaperadvancesimportantissuesbearingonthelimits and the exercise of Union competence in connection with the proposed options for the adoption of a European contract law instrument. Following which, on 11 October 2011, the European Commission published a Proposal foraregulationonacommoneuropeansaleslaw(cesl),notyetadopted. GiventheMemberStatereluctancetoagreetoaformofuniformedcontract lawthecommissionproposalistointroduceacommoneuropeansaleslaw thatisidenticalinalleucountries,butisoptional,inthiswayitbecomesthe partiesthatopttousethesame contractlaw.^thecommissionhasmadeit clearthattheceslwillnotreplacenationallaws.rather,itwillallowsellers that are considering entering a new market to offer an optional system of contractrulesthatareidenticalinalleucountries.thosewhodonotwantto useitcansimplycontinueusingtheexistingnationalrules. GiventhedisharmonyamongstMemberStatesandtheconflictingcontractual lawsthatarelikelytoinfluencecommercialrelationsitispossiblethattheuse of international instruments can form a type of halfway house or a compromise set of rules that the parties can agree on, over and above the PECLandtheCESL.WhilstthiscoursedoesnotprovideaninYdepthstudyof all international conventions it does provide a brief descriptive discussion oversomeofthemorecommonones.thefirstoftheseistheunconvention

3 on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods (CISG), the second, being UNIDROITPrinciplesofInternationalCommercialContracts(UNIDROIT). 2.2.CISG ThepurposeoftheCISGistoprovideamodern,uniformandfairregimefor contracts for the international sale of goods. Thus, the CISG contributes significantlytointroducingcertaintyincommercialexchangesanddecreasing transactioncosts.theadoptionofthecisgprovidesuniformlegislationthat wouldapplywhenevercontractsforthesaleofgoodsareconcludedbetween partieswithaplaceofbusinessincontractingstates.inthesecases,thecisg wouldapplydirectly,avoidingrecoursetorulesofprivateinternationallaw to determine the law applicable to the contract, adding significantly to the certainty and predictability of international sales contracts. The CISG provides a neutral body of rules that can be easily accepted in light of its transnational nature and of the wide availability of interpretative materials. However, one should consider the issue of jurisdiction, as CISG is not internationallyaccepted,forexample,theunitedkingdomisnotasignatory. 2.3.UNIDROIT The objective of the UNIDROIT Principles is to establish a balanced set of rules designed for use throughout the world irrespective of the legal traditionsandtheeconomicandpoliticalconditionsofthecountriesinwhich theyaretobeapplied.thisgoalisreflectedbothintheirformalpresentation andthegeneralpolicyunderlyingthem. Astotheirformalpresentation,theUNIDROITPrinciplesdeliberatelyseekto avoid the use of terminology peculiar to any given legal system. The internationalcharacteroftheunidroitprinciplesisalsostressedbythefact thatthecommentsaccompanyingeachsingleprovisionsystematicallyrefrain fromreferringtonationallawsinordertoexplaintheoriginandrationaleof thesolutionretained. TheinterrelationshipbetweenUNIDROITandCISGisalsodealtwithbythe Principlesthatconsiderthatonlywheretherulehasbeentakenovermoreor lessfromtheworldwideacceptedunitednationsconventiononcontracts for the International Sale of Goods (CISG) is explicit reference made to its

4 source. With regard to substance, the UNIDROIT Principles are sufficiently flexible to take account of the constantly changing circumstances brought aboutbythetechnologicalandeconomicdevelopmentsaffectingcrossyborder trade practice. At the same time they attempt to ensure fairness in internationalcommercialrelationsbyexpresslystatingthegeneraldutyofthe partiestoactinaccordancewithgoodfaithandfairdealingand,inanumber ofspecificinstances,imposingstandardsofreasonablebehaviour.naturally, to the extent that the UNIDROIT Principles address issues also covered by CISG, they follow the solutions found in that Convention, with such adaptations as were considered appropriate to reflect the particular nature andscopeoftheprinciples. 2.4.ConcludingThoughts Whilst there is no direct competence for the EU institutions to develop a codified body of contract law applicable to the governance of commercial agreements there does exist a complex body of EU legislation that in some wayinfluencesallnationalprovisions.moreover,thepeclandthecesldo provide some avenues for a common contract language.z Failing this and looking for a more neutral instrument, two of the main international instrumentscisgandunidroitprovidefurtherchoicesforlawyerswhen engaging in cross border commercial agreement drafting and negotiating. Whilst international instruments provide some solutions they too are not withoutproblems.forexample,cisgisnonybindingintheuk,theremaybe Articles of the instruments that the parties wish to exclude expressly, how shouldthisbedone?doesthiscomplicatetheagreementunnecessarily? 2.5.EssentialReading You are expected to prepare for the class by carrying out the following readingandcometoclasspreparedtodiscuss.allthereadingiseitherfreely available or part of the library catalogue. All the selected materials are availableonline.inadditiontothisstudentsareencouragedtoreadthrough CISGandUNIDROIT. Henry Deeb Gabriel, UNIDROIT Principles as a Source for Global Sales Law,58Vill.L.Rev.661,2013

5 MartijnW.Hesselink, TheCaseforaCommonEuropeanSalesLawinan AgeofRisingNationalism,EuropeanReviewofContractLaw,2012(3),342 Nicole Kornet, The Common European Sales Law and the CISG ComplicatingorSimplifyingtheLegalEnvironment?MaastrichtEuropean PrivateLawInstitute,WorkingPaperNo.2012/4