Cator Can't Compete: Caveat Emptor under CISG Article 35(3)?
Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceeding › Book chapter › Research › peer-review
Standard
Cator Can't Compete : Caveat Emptor under CISG Article 35(3)? / Lookofsky, Joseph.
The CISG Convention and Domestic Contract Law : Harmony, Cross-Inspiration, or Discord?. ed. / Joseph Lookofsky; Mads Bryde Andersen. Copenhagen : Djøf Forlag, 2014. p. 131-146.Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceeding › Book chapter › Research › peer-review
Harvard
APA
Vancouver
Author
Bibtex
}
RIS
TY - CHAP
T1 - Cator Can't Compete
T2 - Caveat Emptor under CISG Article 35(3)?
AU - Lookofsky, Joseph
PY - 2014
Y1 - 2014
N2 - In his contribution to this volume, Professor Joseph Lookofsky argues that the resolution of a given buyer’s non-conformity claim is likely to reflect an attempt to balance competing interests: the countervailing pulls between traditional caveat emptor doctrine (what you see is what you get) and the buyer’s expectation that the seller should be responsible for certain defects (caveat venditor). Since the Danish (and other Scandinavian) domestic solutions to this conundrum do not match the international solution set forth in Article 35(3) of the CISG Convention, and since Article 35(3) has itself been subjected to differing interpretations, Professor Lookofsky sees reason to ask whether these differences might lead to a Scandinavian CISG “homeward trend.”
AB - In his contribution to this volume, Professor Joseph Lookofsky argues that the resolution of a given buyer’s non-conformity claim is likely to reflect an attempt to balance competing interests: the countervailing pulls between traditional caveat emptor doctrine (what you see is what you get) and the buyer’s expectation that the seller should be responsible for certain defects (caveat venditor). Since the Danish (and other Scandinavian) domestic solutions to this conundrum do not match the international solution set forth in Article 35(3) of the CISG Convention, and since Article 35(3) has itself been subjected to differing interpretations, Professor Lookofsky sees reason to ask whether these differences might lead to a Scandinavian CISG “homeward trend.”
M3 - Book chapter
SN - 978-87-574-3376-0
SP - 131
EP - 146
BT - The CISG Convention and Domestic Contract Law
A2 - Lookofsky, Joseph
A2 - Bryde Andersen, Mads
PB - Djøf Forlag
CY - Copenhagen
ER -
ID: 117779882