home   |   contacts   |   reader services   |   advertising

Events

2010 Education Panel Discussion
How Education / Business Partnerships Improve Georgia Schools
March 19, 2010 - 7:30 AM to 9:45 AM
Sponsored By:
Georgia Pacific
GE Energy
North Highland

Social Networks

Linkedin

Twitter

Bookmark and Share

Insights Into Law: Know Your International Sales Contract

Hidden legalities may govern your binding agreements.


by Glenn P. Hendrix and John L. Gornall

January 7, 2009


F
inally, after extensive negotiations and numerous drafts, the contract has been signed. Fictitious Georgia elevator corporation, ATLCo, has signed a contract to purchase 250,000 push buttons from LiftKo, a Korean-based elevator parts manufacturer.

The contract states that, "the law of the State of Georgia, U.S.A. will apply." ATLCo's principal place of business is Georgia, and LiftKo operates in Korea. As an adept business executive, you have years of experience with the uniform commercial code (UCC) and are confident that you understand ATLCo's and LiftKo's contract rights and obligations.

Unbeknownst to both companies, the contract is governed by the Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods (CISG). Georgia law incorporates federal treaties, such as the CISG, into international contracts. This applies to contracts with two parties that are in separate countries that have ratified the CISG. In this case, both United States and Korea have ratified the CISG.

While CISG is not specifically mentioned in your contract, you have unintentionally chosen a set of legal rules for contract formation, rights and obligations, and you are likely not familiar with these terms. These rules are substantially different than those that typically govern such issues in the United States.

CISG attempts to bridge the gap between the laws governing sales of goods in common law countries, such as the United States and England, and civil law countries like Germany, France and largely the rest of the world.

Under civil law, if LiftKo as a seller defaults, courts in Korea would order LiftKo to produce and deliver the push buttons if ATLCo elected to pursue the matter. Similarly, if a Korean court had jurisdiction over ATLCo, and ATLCo did not pay the purchase price of the push buttons as provided in the contract, the Korean court could order the company to pay the contract purchase price for the items. The basic civil law approach is that the parties to a contract should perform their contract obligations. The usual civil law remedy, known as specific performance, is for the court to order the defaulting party to perform.

Under familiar uniform commercial code rules as practiced in the United States, ATLCo would not usually be entitled to specific performance; instead it would be entitled to an action for damages against LiftKo. Similarly, under UCC rules, LiftKo would typically be entitled to an action for damages, not payment of the contract purchase price.

To avoid this and other potentially costly scenarios, the CISG permits the parties to agree that the contract will not be governed by the CISG. Many business executives and their attorneys routinely seek to "opt out" of these rules.

In our fictional example, ATLCo's executives may be very happy to learn that under the CISG, if LiftKo does not deliver the push buttons in a timely manner according to the contract, a Korean court is likely to order LiftKo to produce and deliver the items as agreed, a remedy not usually available under the UCC.

ATLCo may prefer this remedy to obtaining the parts from another supplier ("covering") and then pursuing an action for damages against LiftKo. LiftKo is likely to be more familiar and comfortable with the CISG rules, including remedies, than those available under the United States UCC.

Some foreign buyers and sellers based in civil law countries will not "opt out" of the CISG and insist that it apply to their international sales contracts.

Disregarding the CISG - as it may relate to your international sale contracts - even without being specifically mentioned in those contracts - could be expensive. Resistance to U.S. businesses' desire to opt out of the CISG is growing. The CISG appears to be gradually becoming the "rules of the road" for contracts of the international sale of goods.


Glenn P. Hendrix is managing partner of Atlanta law firm Arnall Golden Gregory.
John L. Gornall is a partner with Arnall Golden Gregory and chair of the Economic Development Practice Team.


Comments

Loading