Published by Manz, Vienna: 1986. Reproduced with their permission.

(...)

After the UNCITRAL Working Group had decided to abandon the concept of ipso facto avoidance, the formulation that a declaration of avoidance must be communicated by a "notice to the other party" was increasingly used in the individual provisions on avoidance. In 1976, the draft proposed by the Working Group contained for the first time a general provision with the same formula for all cases of avoidance.[214] The same provision from the 1978 Draft Convention was adopted in Vienna without further discussion. The fact that a party can avoid a contract by a declaration of avoidance that has immediate effect is familiar to the German jurist. However, in contrast to German law, this declaration does not have to reach the other party in order to be effective (Article 26, in conjunction with Article 27)[215]. In order to be effective, though, the notice must be sent by a means of communication appropriate to the circumstances (Article 27).[page 61]

(...)

FOOTNOTES

* The author of this book participated at the Conference as a member of the delegation from the Federal Republic of Germany. The views expressed here are personal to the author and do not necessarily represent the position of the F.R.G. or its delegation.

214. See 7 UNCITRAL Y.B. 90 (1976), Article 10(2).

215. This provision was already present in the 1978 Draft Convention. See Secretariat's Commentary at 75 § 4; but see Huber at 464. For an analysis of this solution, see infra at VI.A.3.

Go to entire contents of Schlechtriem text

Go to Database Directory || Go to CISG Table of Contents