Why Do Uniform Rules Not Always Deliver Uniform Outcomes? A Closer Look at Article 4(a) CISG and the Issues of Validity

Abstract

The task to come up with a uniform and comprehensible body of international law is never an easy one. Most international instruments have only a limited scope as the instances at which their drafters manage to agree are also limited. The borders which are imposed on the uniform application of contract law create their own complications, mostly based on the need to specify the nexus between the uniform rules of the instrument and the various domestic laws of its signatories. The need to create an instrument which is able to provide for uniformity in the business practices of parties located in different countries called for the adoption of the United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods (CISG). The Convention particularly deals with the formation of contract of sale as well as with the rights and duties of the sellers and the buyers. Nevertheless, the drafters of the CISG left some issues outside the scope of the Convention and this has become a source of some controversies among the contracting states. In this paper the question why the uniform rules do not always produce uniform results will be discussed. For this reason the effect which the existing loopholes have on the fragmentation of the CISG will be looked at. The question of validity excluded from the scope of application of the Convention by means of article 4 will be particularly tackled. Furthermore, an analysis of the different methods of interpretation will be presented and, as a means of example, reference to case law will be made.