Egypt Arbitration Award of 3 October 1995 (Cairo Chamber of Commerce and Industry) [translation available]
[Cite as: http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/951003e1.html]
DATE OF DECISION:
JURISDICTION:
TRIBUNAL:
JUDGE(S):
CASE NUMBER/DOCKET NUMBER: 50/1994
CASE NAME:
CASE HISTORY: Unavailable
SELLER'S COUNTRY: Egypt (respondent)
BUYER'S COUNTRY: United States (claimant)
GOODS INVOLVED: Sets of electrical apparatus
APPLICATION OF CISG: Yes. Choice of law clause provides that issues to be interpreted according to: (1) the conditions of contract; (2) the CISG; (3) "the law of the African State".
APPLICABLE CISG PROVISIONS AND ISSUES
Key CISG provisions at issue:
Classification of issues using UNCITRAL classification code numbers:
Descriptors:
Excerpt from Hossam A. El-Saghir, "The Interpretation of the CISG in the Arab World" (2008)
"Th[is] award concerns a dispute between an Egyptian seller and a US buyer who entered into a contract for the sale of a certain amount of apparatus. The contract contained a dispute settlement provision that refers to arbitration disputes concerning contract interpretation and performance that cannot be settled amicably. It also provided that arbitration is to be conducted according to the rules of Cairo Regional Center for International Commercial Arbitration (CRCICA) and that all issues are to be interpreted according to the conditions of the contract, the CISG and the Egyptian Law, respectively. The Convention was applicable to the contract by virtue of Article 1(1)(a). After delivery of the units, a dispute arose between the parties. The dispute concerned the conformity of some of the supplied units and the seller's non-performance of his duty to extend the bank guarantee for the period to which they agreed. The buyer thus initiated arbitration seeking damages. A single arbitrator-panel was composed.
"The Arbitrator deviated from the autonomous interpretation rules of Article 7 of the Convention. He applied the CISG in parallel with the Egyptian law. He should have applied the Egyptian law only to matters that the Convention fails to resolve either expressly or through the application of its general principles, instead.
"The Arbitrator cited Article 45 of the Convention outlining the way in which it operates. He continued that the Convention's provisions regulating remedies do not differ from those laid by the contract and the Egyptian law. To support his point, the arbitrator mentioned the Egyptian rules concerning contractual liability. He even cited a decision rendered by the Egyptian Court of Cassation applying the Egyptian law. The Arbitrator thus concluded that the seller breached his contractual obligations by not extending the bank guarantee. He thus ruled that that buyer is entitled to recover damages.'
Go to Case Table of ContentsCITATIONS TO ABSTRACTS OF DECISION
(a) UNCITRAL abstract: Unavailable
(b) Other abstracts
English: Unilex database <http://www.unilex.info/case.cfm?pid=1&do=case&id=427&step=Abstract>
CITATIONS TO TEXT OF DECISION
Original language (Arabic): Unavailable
Translation (English): Unilex database <http://www.unilex.info/case.cfm?pid=1&do=case&id=427&step=FullText>; (German): Schweizer Juristen Zeitung 94 (1998) n. 23, 515-518
CITATIONS TO COMMENTS ON DECISION
Unavailable
Go to Case Table of Contents
Pace Law School
Institute of International Commercial Law - Last updated October 28, 2008