[UNCITRAL case digest]

Article 78 [<http://www.cisg.law.pace.edu/cisg/text/e-text-78.html>]

Prerequisites for entitlement to interest

1. This provision deals with the right to interest on "the price or any other sum that is in arrears", with the exception of the instance where the seller has to refund the purchase price after the contract has been avoided, in which case article 84 of the Convention applies.

2. The only prerequisite for the entitlement to interest is the debtor's failure to comply with its obligation to pay the price or any other sum by the time specified in the contract or, absent such specification, by the Convention.[28] Thus, unlike under many national laws, the entitlement to interest does not depend on any formal notice given to the debtor.[29] Therefore, interest starts to accrue as soon as the debtor is in arrears.

3. The entitlement to interest also does not depend on the creditor being able to prove to have suffered any loss. Therefore, interest can be claimed pursuant to article 78 independently from the damage caused by the payment in arrears.[30]

4. As can be derived from the text of article 78, the entitlement to interest on sums in arrears is without prejudice to any claim by the creditor for damages recoverable under article 74.[31] Of course, in order for this claim for damages to be successful, all requirements set forth in article 74 must be met.[32]

Interest rate

5. This provision merely sets forth a general entitlement to interest;[33] it does not specify the interest rate to be applied.

6. The lack of a specific formula to calculate the rate of interest has led some courts to consider this matter as one governed by, albeit not expressly settled in, the Convention.[34] Other courts consider this matter one that is not governed at all by the Convention. This difference in qualifying this matter has led to diverging solutions as to the applicable interest rate, since under the Convention, the matters governed by, but not expressly settled in, the Convention have to be dealt with differently than those falling outside the Convention's scope. According to article 7, paragraph 2, of the Convention, the former matters have to be settled in conformity with the general principles on which the Convention is based or, in the absence of those principles, in conformity with the law applicable by virtue of the rules of private international law. However, if a matter is considered to fall outside the Convention's scope, it must be settled in conformity with the law applicable by virtue of the rules of private international law, without any recourse to the "general principles" of the Convention.

7. Several decisions have sought a solution on the basis of general principles on which the Convention is based. Some court decisions [35] invoked article 9 of the Convention in order to solve the issue of the applicable rates of interest and determined the amount of interest payable according to the relevant trade usages. According to two arbitral awards [36] "the applicable interest rate is to be determined autonomously on the basis of the general principles underlying the Convention", on the grounds that the recourse to domestic law would lead to results contrary to those promoted by the Convention. In these two cases, the issue of the interest rate was solved by resorting to the general principle of full compensation, which led to the application of the law of the creditor, since it is the creditor who has to borrow money in order to be as liquid as it would be had the debtor paid the sum it owed in due time.[37] This solution has been criticized by commentators on the grounds that it contrasts with the legislative history of the Convention, since during the diplomatic conference a proposal to link the rate of interest to the law where the creditor had its place of business was unsuccessful.[38] Furthermore this solution appears not to take into account the line that article 78 expressly draws between the damages to be awarded on the basis of articles 74-77 and interest on sums in arrears, a line acknowledged by many other tribunals.[39]

8. Most courts consider the issue at hand as one not governed at all by the Convention and therefore tend to apply domestic law.[40] In respect of this approach some courts applied the domestic law of a specific country by virtue of the rules of private international law of the forum [41] and others applied the domestic law of the creditor without it being necessarily the law made applicable by the rules of private international law.[42] There also are a few cases in which the rate was determined by reference to the law of the country in whose legal tender the sum of money has to be paid was (lex monetae);[43] in a few other cases, the courts applied the rate of the country in which the price had to be paid.[44]

9. A few courts resorted to the interest rate specified by the UNIDROIT Principles of International Commercial Contracts (art. 7.4.9),[45] as they considered these Principles as laying down general principles upon which the Convention was based.[46]

Despite the variety of solutions mentioned above, there is a clear tendency to apply the rate provided for by the law applicable to the contract,[47] that is, the law that would be applicable to the sales contract if it were not subject to the Convention.[48]

[...]

28. For cases where the courts had to resort to the rules of the Convention, namely, article 58, to determine when the payment was due, since the parties had not agreed upon a specific time of performance, see [Oberlandesgericht (Court of Appeal) Frankfurt am Main 18 January 1994] CLOUT case No. 79, Germany [for English translation of the text of this case, go to http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/940118g1.html]; [Oberlandesgericht (Court of Appeal) Frankfurt am Main 13 June 1991] CLOUT case No. 1, Germany [for further data on the case, see http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/910613g1.html].

29. For this statement in case law, see Landgericht [Regional Court] Aachen, Germany, 20 July 1995, published on the Internet at [http://www.jura.uni-freiburg.de/ipr1/cisg/urteile/text/169.htm] [for English translation of the text of this case, see http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/950720g1.html]; ICC International Court of Arbitration, France, award No. 7585 [of 1992], Journal du droit international, 1995, pp. 1015 ff. [for further data on the case and English text of this case, see http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/927585i1.html]; [Schiedsgericht der Handelskammer Hamburg 21 March 1996] CLOUT case No. 166, Arbitration [Germany] [for further data on the case, see http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/960321g1.html]; See [Cour d'appel (Court of Appeal) de Grenoble, M. Marques Roque Joachim v. La Sarl Holding Manin Rivière, 26 April 1995] CLOUT case No. 152, France [for further data on the case, see http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/950426f2.html]; ICC International Court of Arbitration, France, award No. 7331 [of 1994], Journal du droit international, 1995, pp. 1001 ff. [for further data on the case and English text of this case, see http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/947331i1.html]; Amtsgericht (Local Court) Nordhorn, Germany, 14 June 1994, published on the Internet at [http://www.jura.uni-freiburg.de/ipr1/cisg/urteile/text/259.htm] [for further data on the case and English translation of the text of the case, see http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/940614g1.html]; [Pretore (District Court della giurisdizione di Locarno-Campagna 16 December 1991] CLOUT case No. 55, Switzerland [for English translation of the text of this case, see http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/911216s1.html]; for a court decision stating the contrary, see Landgericht [Regional Court] Zwickau, Germany, 19 March 1999, published on the Internet at [http://www.jura.uni-freiburg.de/ipr1/cisg/urteile/text/519.htm] [for further data on the case, see http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/990319g1.html].

30. See [Oberlandesgericht (Court of Appeal) Frankfurt am Main 18 January 1994] CLOUT case No. 79, Germany [for English translation of the text of this case, go to http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/940118g1.html]; [Landgericht (Regional Court) Hamburg 26 September 1990] CLOUT case No. 5, Germany [for further data on the case, see http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/900926g1.html]; [Amtsgericht (Local Court) Oldenburg in Holstein 24 April 1990] CLOUT case No. 7, Germany [for further data on the case, see http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/900424g1.html].

31. This has often been emphasized in case law; see, e.g., [Bundesgericht (Federal Supreme Court) 28 October 1998] CLOUT case No. 248, Switzerland [for further data on the case, see http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/981028s1.html]; [Handelsgericht (Commercial Court) des Kantons Zürich 21 September 1995] CLOUT case No. 195, Switzerland [for further data on the case, see http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/950921s1.html]; [Oberlandesgericht (Court of Appeal) Frankfurt am Main 18 January 1994] CLOUT case No. 79, Germany [for English translation of the text of this case, go to http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/940118g1.html]; [Oberlandesgericht (Court of Appeal) Düsseldorf 14 January 1994] CLOUT case No. 130, Germany [for further data on the case and English translation of the text of the case, see http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/940114g1.html]; [Oberlandesgericht (Court of Appeal) Koblenz 17 September 1993] CLOUT case No. 281, Germany [for further data on the case, see http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/930917g1.html]; [ICC International Court of Arbitration award No. 7197 of 1992] CLOUT case No. 104, Arbitration [for further data on the case, see http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/927197i1.html]; [Amtsgericht (Local Court) Oldenburg in Holstein 24 April 1990] CLOUT case No. 7, Germany [for further data on the case, see http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/900424g1.html].

32. See Landgericht [Regional Court] Oldenburg, Germany, 9 November 1994, Recht der internationalen Wirtschaft, 1996, pp. 65 f. [for further data on the case, see http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/941109g1.html], where the creditor's claim for damages caused by the failure to pay was dismissed on the grounds that the creditor did not prove that it had suffered any additional loss.

33. See ICC International Court of Arbitration, France, award No. 7585 [of 1992], Journal du droit international, 1995, pp. 1015 ff. [for further data on the case and English text of this case, see http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/927585i1.html]; [Oberlandesgericht (Court of Appeal) München 2 March 1994] CLOUT case No. 83, Germany [for further data on the case and English translation of the text of the case, see http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/940302g1.html]; [Oberlandesgericht (Court of Appeal) Frankfurt am Main 18 January 1994] CLOUT case No. 79, Germany [for English translation of the text of this case, go to http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/940118g1.html]; Oberlandesgericht (Court of Appeal) Koblenz, Germany, 17 September 1993, Recht der internationalen Wirtschaft, 1993, p. 938 [for further data on the case, see http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/930917g1.html]; [Oberlandesgericht (Court of Appeal) Frankfurt am Main 13 June 1991] CLOUT case No. 1, Germany [for further data on the case, see http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/910613g1.html].

34. For a case listing various criteria used in case law to determine the rate of interest, see ICC International Court of Arbitration, France, award No. 7585 [of 1992], Journal du droit international, 1995, pp. 1015 ff. [for further data on the case, see http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/927585i1.html].

35. See Juzgado Nacional de Primera Instancia en lo Comercial [National Commercial Court of First Instance] n. 10 [Bermatex s.r.l. v. Valentin Rius Clapers S.A. v. Sbrojovka], Buenos Aires, Argentina, 6 October 1994, UNILEX [for further data on the case, see http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/941006a1.html]; Juzgado Nacional de Primera Instancia en lo Comercial [National Commercial Court of First Instance] n. 10 [Aguila Refractarios S.A. / Conc. Preventivo], Buenos Aires, Argentina, 23 October 1991, UNILEX [for further data on the case, see http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/911023a1.html].

36. See [Internationales Schiedsgericht der Bundeskammer der gewerblichen Wirtschaft, awards Nos. SCH-4366 and SCH-4318 of 15 June 1994] CLOUT cases Nos. 93 and 94, Arbitration [Austria] [for English translations of the texts of these cases, go to http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/940615a3.html and http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/940615a4.html].

37. For a similar solution, that is, for an arbitral award basing its decision on the argument that the interest rate of the country has to apply in which the damage occurred, that is the country in which the creditor has its place of business, see also ICC International Court of Arbitration, France, award No. 7331 [of 1994], Journal du droit international, 1995, pp. 1001 ff. [for further data on the case and English text of this case, see http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/947331i1.html].

38. See Official Records of the United Nations Conference on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods, Vienna, 10 March-11 April 1980 (United Nations publication, Sales No. E.81.IV.3), pp. 137-138.

39. For decisions which expressly refer to the distinction drawn between the interests which can be claimed on the basis of article 78 and the damages which can be claimed on the basis of articles 74-77, see [Handelsgericht (Commercial Court) des Kantons Zürich 21 September 1995] CLOUT case No. 195, Switzerland [for further data on the case, see http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/950921s1.html]; Landgericht [Regional Court] München, Germany, 29 May 1995, Neue Juristische Wochenschrift, 1996, pp. 401 ff. [for further data on the case, see http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/950529g1.html]; [Oberlandesgericht (Court of Appeal) Frankfurt am Main 18 January 1994] CLOUT case No. 79, Germany [for English translation of the text of this case, go to http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/940118g1.html]; [Landgericht (Regional Court) Hamburg 26 September 1990] CLOUT case No. 5, Germany [for further data on the case, see http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/900926g1.html]; [Landgericht (Regional Court) Aachen 3 April 1990] CLOUT case No. 46, Germany [for further data on the case, see http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/900403g1.html].

40. Note that some courts did not decide which law was applicable; this was possible, since all the countries involved in the particular dispute provided for either the same rate of interest (see, for example, [Oberlandesgericht (Court of Appeal) Frankfurt am Main 20 April 1994] CLOUT case No. 84, Germany [for further data on the case, see http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/940420g1.html]; [Pretore (District Court) della giurisdizione di Locarno-Campagna 27 April 1992] CLOUT case No. 56, Switzerland [for English translation of the text of this case, see http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/920427s1.html]) or an interest rate higher than the one claimed by the plaintiff (see Oberlandesgericht [Court of Appeal) Dresden, Germany, 27 December 1999, Transportrecht-Internationales Handelsrecht, 2000, pp. 20 ff.) [for English translation of the text of this case, see http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/991227g1.html]

41. See Landgericht [Regional Court] Stendal, Germany, 12 October 2000, Internationales Handelsrecht, 2001, p. 31 [for English translation of the text of this case, see http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/001012g1.html]; Oberlandesgericht [Court of Appeal] Stuttgart, Germany, 28 February 2000, OLG-Report Stuttgart, 2000, 407 f. [for English translation of the text of this case, see http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/000228g1.html]; [Tribunale (Regional Court) di Pavia (Tessile 21 S.r.l. v. Ixela S.A.) 29 December 1999] CLOUT case No. 380, Italy [for English translation of the text of this case in process, go to http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cisg/text/draft/991229case.html]; [Kantonsgericht (District Court) des Kantons Zug 25 February 1999] CLOUT case No. 327, Switzerland [for further data on the case, see http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/990225s1.html]; [Landgericht (Regional Court) Flensburg 24 March 1999] CLOUT case No. 377, Germany [for English translation of the text of this case, see http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/990324g2.html]; [Bundesgericht (Federal Supreme Court), E.K., L. und A. v. F., 28 October 1998] CLOUT case No. 248, Switzerland [for further data on the case, see http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/981028s1.html]; [Oberlandesgericht (Court of Appeal) Koblenz 31 January 1997] CLOUT case No. 282, Germany [for further data on the case, see http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/970131g1.html]; ICC International Court of Arbitration, France, award No. 8611 [of 1997], UNILEX (stating that the relevant interest rate is either that of the lex contractus or, in exceptional cases, that of the lex monetae) [for English translation of the text of this case, go to http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/978611i1.html]; [Landgericht (Regional Court) Bielefeld 2 August 1996] CLOUT case No. 376, Germany [for English translation of the text of this case, see http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/960802g1.html]; Tribunal [District Court] de la Glâne, Switzerland, 20 May 1996, Schweizerische Zeitschrift für Internationales und Europäisches Recht, 1997, p. 136 [for further data on the case, see http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/960520s1.html]; [Schiedsgericht der Handelskammer Hamburg 21 March 1996] CLOUT case No. 166, Arbitration [Germany] [for further data on the case, see http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/960321g1.html]; Appelationsgericht [Court of Appeal] Tessin, Switzerland, 12 February 1996, Schweizerische Zeitschrift für Internationales und Europäisches Recht, 1996, p. 125 [for further data on the case, see http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/960212s1.html]; Amtsgericht [Local Court] Augsburg, Germany, 29 January 1996, UNILEX [for further data on the case, see http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/960129g1.html]; [Handelsgericht (Commercial Court) des Kantons St. Gallen 5 December 1995] CLOUT case No. 330, Switzerland [for further data on the case, see http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/951205s1.html]; Amtsgericht Kehl, Germany, 6 October 1995, Recht der internationalen Wirtschaft, 1996, pp. 957 f. [for English translation of the text of this case, go http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/951006g1.html]; [Handelsgericht (Commercial Court) des Kantons Zürich 21 September 1995] CLOUT case No. 195, Switzerland [for further data on the case, see http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/950921s1.html]; [Oberlandesgericht (Court of Appeal) Rostock 27 July 1995] CLOUT case No. 228, Germany [for English translation of the text of this case, see http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/950727g1.html]; Landgericht (Regional Court) Aachen, Germany, 20 July 1995, UNILEX [for English translation of the text of this case, see http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/950720g1.html]; Landgericht (Regional Court) Kassel, Germany, 22 June 1995, published on the Internet at [http://www.jura.uni-freiburg.de/ipr1/cisg/urteile/text/370.htm] [for further data on the case, see http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/950622g1.html]; [Oberlandesgericht (Court of Appeal) Celle 24 May 1995] CLOUT case No. 136, Germany [for English translation of the text of this case, go to http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/950524g1.html]; Amtsgericht [Local Court] Alsfeld, Germany, 12 May 1995, Neue Juristische Wochenschrift Rechtsprechungs-Report, 1996, pp. 120 f. [for further data on the case, see http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/950512g1.html]; Landgericht [Regional Court] Landshut, Germany, 5 April 1995, published on the Internet at [http://www.jura.uni-freiburg.de/ipr1/cisg/urteile/text/193.htm] [for English translation of the text of this case, see http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/950405g1.html]; Landgericht [Regional Court] München, Germany, 20 March 1995, Praxis des internationalen Privat- und Verfahrensrechts, 1996, pp. 31 ff. [for English translation of the text of this case, go to http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/950320g1.html]; Landgericht [Regional Court] Oldenburg, Germany, 15 February 1995, published on the Internet at [http://www.jura.uni-freiburg.de/ipr1/cisg/urteile/text/149.htm] [for further data on the case, see http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/950215g2.html]; [Oberlandesgericht (Court of Appeal) Hamm 8 February 1995] CLOUT case No. 132, Germany [for further data on the case, see http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/950208g3.html]; [ICC International Court of Arbitration award No. 7565 of 1994] CLOUT case No. 300, Arbitration [for further data on the case and English text of this case, see http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/947565i1.html]; Kantonsgericht [Court of Appeal] Zug, Switzerland, 15 December 1994, Schweizerische Zeitschrift für Internationales und Europäisches Recht, 1997, p. 134 [for further data on the case, see http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/941215s1.html]; Landgericht [Regional Court] Oldenburg, Germany, 9 November 1994, Neue Juristische Wochenschrift Rechtsprechungs-Report, 1995, p. 438 [for English translation of the text of this case, see http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/941109g1.html]; Kantonsgericht [Court of Appeal] Zug, Switzerland, 1 September 1994, Schweizerische Zeitschrift für Internationales und Europäisches Recht, 1997, pp. 134 f. [for further data on the case, see http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/940901s1.html]; Landgericht [Regional Court] Düsseldorf, Germany, 25 August 1994, published on the Internet at http://www.jura.uni-freiburg.de/ipr1/Convention/ [for further data on the case, see http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/940825g1.html]; Landgericht [Regional Court] Giessen, Germany, 5 July 1994, Neue Juristische Wochenschrift Rechtsprechungs-Report, 1995, pp. 438 f. [for further data on the case, see http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/940705g1.html]; Rechtbank [District Court] Amsterdam [V.o.f. Galerie Moderne v. J.M.M. Waal], The Netherlands, 15 June 1994, Nederlands Internationaal Privaatrecht, 1995, pp. 194 f. [for further data on the case, see http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/940615n1.html]; Amtsgericht [Local Court] Nordhorn, Germany, 14 June 1994, published on the Internet at [http://www.jura.uni-freiburg.de/ipr1/cisg/urteile/text/259.htm] [for further data on the case and English translation of the text of the case, see http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/940614g1.html]; [Oberlandesgericht (Court of Appeal) München 2 March 1994] CLOUT case No. 83, Germany [for further data on the case and English translation of the text of the case, see http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/940302g1.html]; [Oberlandesgericht (Court of Appeal) Düsseldorf, No. 6 U 119/93, 10 February 1994] CLOUT case No. 82, Germany [for English translation of the text of this case, see http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/940210g2.html]; [Oberlandesgericht (Court of Appeal) Düsseldorf, No. 6 U 32/93, 10 February 1994] CLOUT case No. 81, Germany [for English translation of the text of this case, go to http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/940210g1.html]; [Kammergericht (Court of Appeal) Berlin 24 January 1994] CLOUT case No. 80, Germany [for further data on the case and English translation of the text of the case, see http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/940124g1.html]; [Oberlandesgericht (Court of Appeal) Frankfurt am Main 18 January 1994] CLOUT case No. 79, Germany [for English translation of the text of this case, go to http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/940118g1.html]; [Rechtbank (District Court) Arnhem,Nieuwenhoven Veehandel GmbH v. Diepeveen BV, 30 December 1993] CLOUT case No. 100, The Netherlands [for further data on the case, see http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/931230n1.html]; Tribunal cantonal [Court of Appeal] Vaud, Switzerland, 6 December 1993, UNILEX [for further data on the case, see http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/931206s1.html]; [Oberlandesgericht (Court of Appeal) Koblenz 17 September 1993] CLOUT case No. 281, Germany [for further data on the case, see http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/930917g1.html]; [Handelsgericht (Commercial Court) des Kantons Zürich 9 September 1993] CLOUT case No. 97, Switzerland [for further data on the case, see http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/930909s1.html]; Rechtbank [District Court] Roermond [Gruppo IMAR S.p.A. v. Protech Horst] The Netherlands, 6 May 1993, UNILEX [for further data on the case, see http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/930506n1.html]; Landgericht [Regional Court] Verden, Germany, 8 February 1993, UNILEX [for further data on the case, see http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/930208g1.html]; [Zivilgericht des Kantons Basel-Stadt,W.T. GmbH v. P. AG, 21 December 1992] CLOUT case No. 95, Switzerland [for English translation of the text of this case, see http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/921221s1.html]; Amtsgericht [Local Court] Zweibrücken, Germany, 14 October 1992, published on the Internet at [http://www.jura.uni-freiburg.de/ipr1/cisg/urteile/text/46.htm] [for further data on the case, see http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/921014g1.html]; [Oberlandesgericht (Court of Appeal) Hamm 22 September 1992] CLOUT case No. 227, Germany [for further data on the case, see http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/920922g1.html]; Landgericht [Regional Court] Heidelberg, Germany, 3 July 1992, UNILEX [for further data on the case, see http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/920703g1.html]; [Pretore (District Court) della giurisdizione di Locarno-Campagna 16 December 1991] CLOUT case No. 55, Switzerland [for English translation of the text of this case, see http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/911216s1.html]; [Oberlandesgericht (Court of Appeal) Frankfurt am Main 13 June 1991] CLOUT case No. 1, Germany [for further data on the case, see http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/910613g1.html]; [Landgericht (Regional Court) Hamburg 26 September 1990] CLOUT case No. 5, Germany [for further data on the case, see http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/900926g1.html]; [Amtsgericht (Local Court) Oldenburg in Holstein 24 April 1990] CLOUT case No. 7, Germany [for further data on the case, see http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/900424g1.html].

42. Several court decisions referred to the domestic law of the creditor as the law applicable, independently of whether the rules of private international law made that law applicable; see Bezirksgericht [Regional Court] Arbon, Switzerland, 9 December 1994, UNILEX [for further data on the case, see http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/941209s1.html]; [Landgericht (Regional Court) Frankfurt am Main 16 September 1991] CLOUT case No. 6, Gemany [for further data on the case, see http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/910916g1.html]; [Landgericht (Regional Court) Stuttgart 31 August 1989] CLOUT case No. 4, Germany [for English translation of the text of this case, go to http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/890831g1.html]. For a criticism of the latter decision by a court, see Landgericht [Regional Court) Kassel, Germany, 22 June 1995, UNILEX [for further data on the case, see http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/950622g1.html]

43. See [Arbitration Court attached to the Hungarian Chamber of Commerce and Industry 5 December 1995] CLOUT case No. 164, Arbitration [for English translation of the text of this case, see http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/951205h1.html]; Arbitration Court attached to the Hungarian Chamber of Commerce and Industry, Hungary, 17 November 1995, UNILEX [for further data on the case, see http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/951117h1.html].

44. See Rechtbank [District Court] Almelo [Wolfgang Richter Montagebau GmbH v. V.o.f. Handelsonderneming Euro-Agra and Te Wierik] The Netherlands, 9 August 1995, Nederlands Internationaal Privaatrecht, 1995, p. 686 [for further data on the case, see http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/950809n1.html].

45. See ICC International Court of Arbitration, France, award No. 8128 [of 1995], Journal du droit international, 1996, pp. 1024 ff. [for further data on the case, see http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/958128i1.html] For a case where the London interbank offered rate (LIBOR) was applied, see [ICC International Court of Arbitration award No. 6653 of 1993] CLOUT case No. 103, Arbitration [for English translation of the text of this case, see http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/936653i1.html]; note that this arbitral award was later annulled on the grounds that international trade usages do not provide appropriate rules to determine the applicable interest rate; see Cour d'appel [Court of Appeal] de Paris [Thyssen v. Maaden], France, 6 April 1995, Journal du droit international, 1995, pp. 971 ff. [for English translation of the text of this case, see http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/950406f1.html].

46. See article 7(2) of the Convention: "Questions concerning matters governed by this Convention which are not expressly settled in it are to be settled in conformity with the general principles on which it is based or, in the absence of such principles, in conformity with the law applicable by virtue of the rules of private international law."

47. Some courts referred to this solution as a unanimous one; see [Oberlandesgericht (Court of Appeal) Hamm 8 February 1995] CLOUT case No. 132, Germany [for further data on the case, see http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/950208g3.html]; [Handelsgericht (Commercial Court) des Kantons Zürich 9 September 1993] CLOUT case No. 97, Switzerland [for further data on the case, see http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/930909s1.html]. In the light of the remarks in the text, it is apparent that, although this solution is the prevailing one, it has not been unanimously accepted.

48. For case law stating the same, see Landgericht [Regional Court] Aachen, Germany, 20 July 1995, UNILEX [for further data on the case, see http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/950720g1.html]; Amtsgericht [Local Court] Riedlingen, Germany, 21 October 1994, UNILEX [for further data on the case, see http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/941021g1.html]; Amtsgericht [Local Court] Nordhorn, Germany, 14 June 1994, UNILEX [for English translation of the text of this case, see http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/940614g1.html].