The buyer refused to accept the goods the buyer asked

The [Buyer] refused to accept the goods. The [Buyer] asked the [Seller] to send a member of its
staff to Germany to inspect the goods, with the cost paid by the [Seller] in advance. In the
alternative, the [Buyer] offered to send back a sample of the goods to the [Seller] so the [Seller]
could itself inspect the goods for quality. However, the [Seller] disregarded the [Buyer]'s
suggestions and did not institute any procedures to so resolve the dispute.
Since the quality of the goods was not consistent with the contractual terms, and the customer
to whom [Buyer] was reselling the goods refused to accept the goods, the [Buyer] was forced
to reduce the price and resell the goods to another party and therefore suffered a loss of more
than US $60,000, which was mainly due to the reduced selling price.
The [Buyer] alleged that this loss was due to [Seller]'s unsatisfactory performance of the
Contract. Therefore, so as to protect the [Buyer]'s rights, the [Buyer] requested the Arbitration
Tribunal to rule, in accordance with the Contract conditions, that the [Seller] should bear the
loss.
Look at the situation above in light of CISG. Identify which issues arise and which articles
cover them? For the issues you have identified, provide comment and analysis.
Article 35 – quality, quantity etc. (2) ordinary purpose
Sellers fault à Remedies:
-­‐ Damages
-­‐ (Avoidance? A.49)

-­‐ A. 46 Substitute goods
-­‐ A. 50 Reduction of price
EXAM 2015 -­‐ CISG
Your company has ordered a large quantity of water filtering equipment for commercial
purposes from the USA. The contract, which is in written form, does not provide specifications
and dimensions of the units, only the number required (10.000 units), purpose (agricultural)
and price per item ($10). It also says, “detailed specifications to be agreed at a later date”.
When you later talk with the American seller over the phone, you tell them exactly what
equipment you want and they assure you that “all will be as you ask”. You are rather shocked
when, three weeks later, the equipment delivered does not fit what you agreed on the phone
at all. Your American partner cannot remember the phone conversation and claims that what
it supplied is what it ordinarily sells from its catalogue.
Assuming that CISG applies, how does it deal with this situation? Should the parties to this
contract have drafted it differently?
Offer Water -­‐ Article 65.
Implied Interpretation-­‐ Article 8
Article 35
Article 20 -­‐ phone
EXAM 2013 RETAKE