Case Study on the application of the U.N Convention on Contract for Term Paper

Case Study on the application of the U.N Convention on Contract for the International Sale of Goods - Term Paper Example Thus, it becomes evident that in the present case, it is possible to apply the CISG. The second important factor to be considered is what happens if one party fails to deliver the products within the specified date. Admittedly, according to the contract, the products were to be delivered by 15th July. However, the products were delivered only on 4th August. According to Article 33 (a) of CSIG, the seller must deliver the goods on the day fixed by or determinable from the contract. Evidently, the contract had fixed the date of delivery as 15th July. However, it seems that FireWeasel (buyer) did not give GeniuX (seller) an additional period of time of reasonable length to deliver the goods. According to Article 47, paragraph 1, the buyer may fix an additional period of time of reasonable length for performance by the seller of his obligations. However, in the present case, it seems that the buyer did not fix any additional period of time for the seller and there was no communication in this connection. So, it becomes evident that though the seller failed to deliver the goods in time, the buyer loses the legal right to claim that the contract was avoided. The third important point is what happens when the contract does not mention anything about the quality of the product ordered. It is evident from the case that the products delivered by the seller are not good enough to enable the buyer to compete in the market. Article 35 (2a) points out that unless agreed otherwise, the goods do not conform to the contract if they are not fit for the purpose for which goods of the same description are normally used. However, the case shows that the products delivered are not so bad and are only slightly inferior to other competitors. Thus, it is possible for the buyer to rely on the poor quality of the products delivered. Another important point is how and when the matter of lack of conformity should be informed by the buyer to the seller. It is pointed out in Article 39 that the buyer loses the right to claim lack of conformity if he does not give notice to the seller, specifying the nature of the lack of conformity within a reasonable time period. Evidently, the buyer in the present case has promptly informed the seller about the lack of conformity. It is seen that the product was delivered on 4th August and was inspected on 8th August. On 9th August, the lack of conformity was reported to the seller by email. Another important point is if the buyer has the responsibility to allow the seller some time to replace the products at their own expense and if the seller has the legal right to request for such chance. According to Article 47 (1), it is the duty of the buyer to fix an additional period of time of reasonable length for the seller to fulfil his obligations. However, it is seen that though the buyer informed the seller about the poor quality of the products, it did not give the seller a chance to improve the performance. It means that though the b uyer can claim that the products were of poor quality, it will not get any legal benefits as it failed to allow the seller a reasonable time to improve the performance. Now the question arises as to whether the buyer has the responsibility to pay for the products it purchased. It is pointed out in Article 53 that the buyer must pay the price for the goods and take delivery of the products in