The plaintiff, Pratt & Whitney, negotiated with the defendant, Malev Airlines, to sell
jet engines to it. After negotiation, on December 14, 1990, the plaintiff sent a proposal
to defendant, with a deadline for the proposal of December 21, 1990. The defendant
accepted the proposal on December 21, 1990. However, on March 25, 1991, the
defendant informed the plaintiff that it would not buy the jet engine from plaintiff
1. Given the condition that the aircraft is excluded from the coverage of CISG, should
the aircraft parts be covered under the CISG?
2. Whether the proposal without a fixed price or quantity was an offer?
3. Whether the defendant’s response on December 21, 1990, was an acceptance?
1. Yes. According to Article 3 of the CISG, “such component parts are covered as
contracts relating to the production of goods”.
2. Yes. According to the Article 14 of the CISG, “plaintiff’s proposal of December 14,
1990, was a legal offer under the CISG”.
3. Yes. According to the Article 23 of the CISG, the court believed that “defendant’s
response of December 21, 1990, established a valid agreement”, that is, it was an
1. According to the Article 2 of CISG, the sale of “ships, vessels, hovercraft, or
aircraft” is not covered. However, in this case, the goods is a component of the
aircraft, which should not be bound in the Article to. Thus, it should be covered under
2. According to the Article 14 of the CISG, as long as a proposal is “addressed to one