A manufacturer based in Argentina and an importer based in New Jersey entered into an oral agreement under which the importer agreed to sell the manufacturer's products in the United States. The district court found that the manufacturer's claim that the importer had failed to pay the full amount due was barred by the United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods (CISG) because the agreement was not in writing. Although the CISG eliminated formal writing requirements for contracts, Argentina had made a declaration opting out of that provision. However, the United States had not made such a declaration. The court of appeals held that it was necessary to consider New Jersey choice-of-law rules to determine whether New Jersey or Argentine form requirements governed the manufacturer's claim. Does the contract need documentation to be enforceable, or, if U.S. law applies with the adoption of the CISG, are the oral declarations satisfactory?
Answer to relevant QuestionsWhat determines the obligations of sellers/lessors and buyers/lessees? Shipping terms play an important role in determining when title, risk of loss, and insurable interest pass from seller to buyer. What is the significance of such terms as CIF and FAS in determining such issues? What happens ...Explain the reason behind the need for negotiable instruments. Doseung Chung, the plaintiff, a horse player, was at Belmont Park Racetrack, which is owned by the defendant, New York Racing Association. While at the track, Chung was using a voucher to place bets on the races through an ...A business associate of an elderly man persuaded the man to issue a $10,000 check to recover a failed investment as part of a scam perpetrated on the maker of the check. The business associate (endorser) presented the check ...
Post your question