THE SCOPE OF CISG IN CHINA AND BRAZIL AND FACILITATION OF TRADE WITH PORTUGUESE SPEAKING COUNTRIES

Authors

  • M. P. Ramaswamy University of Macau, Macau SAR, Republic of China

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.20319/pijss.2017.32.7892

Keywords:

Trade Facilitation, Harmonization of Sale of Goods Law, Scope and Limitations of CISG, China and Lusophone Countries, Role of Macau SAR

Abstract

Trade facilitation achieved through harmonization of private law governing international trade is well recognized. The CISG, albeit being a hall mark of a successful harmonization attracted a limited interest from the Portuguese speaking (Lusophone) countries except Brazil. In the light of China’s trading interest with the Lusophone Countries, the question of relevance of the CISG to promote Sino-Lusophone trade gains significance. To address the above question, this paper seeks to examine the scope and limitations of the CISG application to China and Brazil and adopts a case law method to examine the jurisprudence resulting from judicial interpretations and arbitration awards. The paper examines the reception of the CISG in both countries, before enquiring the significance of the CISG in facilitating their bilateral trade. The paper briefly refers to the implications arising from the lack of formal extension of the CISG by China to Macau SAR, which has been designated as a jurisdiction to facilitate trade between China and Lusophone Countries. In conclusion, the paper underscores the importance of the CISG based on the findings of its scope of application in China and Brazil and calls for the need to study the phenomenon further in the light of the experience of post Brazilian accession to the CISG. 

References

Cerqueira, V da C Gustavo. (2007). Defective Performance in Contract for International Sale of Goods: A Comparative Analysis between the Brazilian Law and the 1980 United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods. Pace International Law Review (Ed.). Review of the Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods (CISG): 2005-2006 (23-84) Munich: Sellier. European Law Publisher.

CIETAC. (2004, 24 December). Medical equipment case. China International Economic & Trade Arbitration Commission Arbitration Award, English translation provided by Pace Law School Institute of International Commercial Law. (August 29, 2008). CISG Case Presentation, CISG Database available online at http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/041224c1.html accessed on 5 April 2017.

Efrat, A. (2016) Promoting trade through private law: Explaining international legal harmonization. The Review of International Organizations, 11(3), 311-336.

Faria, A.E. Jose. (2015). Another BRIC in the wall: Brazil joins the CISG. Uniform Law Review, 20, 211–242. doi:10.1093/ulr/unv013.

High People's Court of Jiangsu Province. (2002, 25 December). Zhuguang Oil Company v. Wuxi Zhongrui Group Corporation. English translation published by CISG Case Presentation, CISG Database, Pace Law School Institute of International Commercial Law. (May 11, 2010). Retrieved from http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/021225c1.html.

Moss, S. (2005-06).Why the United Kingdom has not ratified the CISG. Journal of Law and Commerce, 25(1), 483-485.

Qingdao Intermediate People's Court of Shandong. (2005, 13 June). Qingdao Benefim Trading Co. Ltd. v. Sinochem International. English translation provided by Pace Law School Institute of International Commercial Law. (February 2, 2010). CISG Case Presentation, CISG Database available online at http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/050613c2.html accessed on 5 April 2017.

Rio Grande do Sul Appellate Court. (2009, 20 May). Prakasa Indústria e Comércio de utilidades do lar Ltda. v. Mercomáquinas Indústria Comércio e Representações Ltda. English translation provided by Pace Law School Institute of International Commercial Law. (December 5, 2012). CISG Case Presentation, CISG Database available online at http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/090520b5.html accessed on 8th April 2017.

Sao Paulo Appellate Court. (2007, 3 July). Auto Posto Shopping Diadema Ltda. & others v. Mercoil Distribuidora de Petróleo Ltda. English translation provided by Pace Law School Institute of International Commercial Law. (December 5, 2012). CISG Case Presentation, CISG Database available online at http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/070703b5.html accessed on 7th April 2017.

Sao Paulo Appellate Court. (2008, 24 April). José Henrique S. Nascimento de Souza & other v. Construtora Costa Norte Empreendimentos Imobiliários SC Ltda. English translation provided by Pace Law School Institute of International Commercial Law. (December 5, 2012). CISG Case Presentation, CISG Database available online at http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/080424b5.html accessed on 7 April 2017.

Second Intermediate People's Court of Shanghai. (2003, 20 June). Dong Feng Trade Co. Ltd. v. Hangzhou Dongli Rubber & Plastomer Co. Ltd. English translation published by CISG Case Presentation, CISG Database, Pace Law School Institute of International Commercial Law. (February 2, 2010). Retrieved from http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/030620c1.html.

Superior Court of Justice of Brazil. (2009, 19 August). Atecs Mannesmann GMBH v. Rodrimar S/A Transportes Equipamentos Industriais e Armazns Gerais. English translation provided by Pace Law School Institute of International Commercial Law. (October 21, 2013). CISG Case Presentation, CISG Database available online at http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/090819b5.html accessed on 8 April 2017.

UNCITRAL. (1980, April 11). United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods (Vienna, 11 April 1980) (CISG). Retrieved from http://www.uncitral.org/uncitral/en/uncitral_texts/sale_goods/1980CISG.html

UNECE. (2012, September). Trade Facilitation Implementation Guide. Geneva: United Nations Economic Council for Europe. Retrieved from http://tfig.unece.org/details.html.

UNECE. (2015). Training Manual for Trade Facilitation Implementation Guide. New York and Geneva: United Nations. Retrieved from www.gfptt.org/sites/default/files/refread/Training-guide-final.pdf.

United Nations Information Service (UNIS). (2013, January 18). China Withdraws ‘Written Form’ Declaration under the United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods (CISG). United Nations Information Service Press Release- UNIS/L/180. Retrieved from http://www.unis.unvienna.org/unis/pressrels/2013/unisl180.html.

Zhen, P. (2016-17). China’s Withdrawal of Article 96 of the CISG: A Roadmap for the United States and China to Reconsider Withdrawing the Article 95 Reservation. University of Miami Business Law Review, 25(1), 141-167.

Downloads

Published

2017-03-31

How to Cite

Ramaswamy, M. (2017). THE SCOPE OF CISG IN CHINA AND BRAZIL AND FACILITATION OF TRADE WITH PORTUGUESE SPEAKING COUNTRIES. PEOPLE: International Journal of Social Sciences, 3(2), 78–92. https://doi.org/10.20319/pijss.2017.32.7892