Exam (elaborations)
LJU4804 Semester 1 2025 Assignment 2
(Unique Number: 166975) - DUE 16 April
Private International Law - LJU4804 Assignment 2 Semester 1 2025 (166975)
- DUE 16 April 2025 ;100 % TRUSTED workings, Expert Solved, Explanations
and Solutions......
Computec (Pty) Ltd is a South African company with its principal place of
business in Johannesburg, South Africa. Computec manufactures and exports
computer hardware components. Technologie GmbH is a German company
with its principal place of business in Hamburg, Germany. Technologie
regularly purchases large consignments of computer hardware from
Computec. It has become standard practice between the companies that the
goods are shipped CIF (Hamburg) (Incoterms 2020). Payment is always made
by means of confirmed letters of credit, issued by Deutsche Bank (Berlin)
and confirmed by Rand Merchant Bank, (Johannesburg). The contract
contains a choice of law clause in favour of German law. During June 2023, a
dispute arose as to the quality of a shipment of computer components
received in May of that year. Technologie argued that the quality of the hard
drives received in that shipment, were not of the same quality as those
received in previous orders and demanded that the hard drives be replaced.
Computec refused, arguing that the goods were in conformity with the
contract. In February 2024, Technologie instituted a claim against Computec
in the South Gauteng High Court. 1.1 Germany is a CISG contracting state.
Should the CISG be applied to the dispute between the parties? (Refer to the
applicability criteria of the CISG and your prescribed journal article on the
topic). (3)
To determine whether the CISG (United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International
Sale of Goods) should apply to the dispute between Computec (Pty) Ltd and Technologie
GmbH, we must consider the criteria for applicability of the CISG:
1. Parties' Locations:
The CISG applies to contracts for the sale of goods between parties whose places of
business are in different Contracting States (Article 1(1)(a)).
In this case, Computec is based in Johannesburg, South Africa, and Technologie is
based in Hamburg, Germany. Germany is a Contracting State to the CISG, and South
Africa has not ratified the CISG as of now. Therefore, South Africa is not a Contracting
State to the CISG.
2. Exclusion by Choice of Law:
, The contract between the parties includes a choice of law clause in favor of German
law.
Under Article 6 of the CISG, parties may exclude the application of the CISG in whole or
in part through their agreement. By choosing German law, it is likely that the parties
intended for the CISG to be excluded, since German law (as a Contracting State to the
CISG) could provide for a legal framework that aligns with the principles of the CISG.
Conclusion:
While the CISG could potentially apply under the criteria set out in Article 1(1)(a) if both parties
were in CISG contracting states, in this case, the fact that South Africa is not a Contracting State
and the choice of law clause refers to German law suggests that the CISG will not apply to the
dispute. The dispute would likely be governed by German law instead, as per the parties’
agreement.
1. Applicability of the CISG (per Article 1 of the CISG):
According to Article 1(1)(a) of the CISG, the Convention applies to contracts of sale of goods
between parties whose places of business are in different contracting states.
Germany is a CISG contracting state.
South Africa is not a CISG contracting state.
So, at first glance, Article 1(1)(a) does not apply.
However, Article 1(1)(b) provides that the CISG may still apply when the rules of private
international law lead to the application of the law of a Contracting State.
In this case:
The contract includes a choice of law clause in favour of German law.
Since German law includes the CISG, this means the CISG is incorporated through
the choice of law.
Therefore, via Article 1(1)(b), the CISG applies to this dispute.
🔹 2. Prescribed Journal Article Perspective:
LJU4804 Semester 1 2025 Assignment 2
(Unique Number: 166975) - DUE 16 April
Private International Law - LJU4804 Assignment 2 Semester 1 2025 (166975)
- DUE 16 April 2025 ;100 % TRUSTED workings, Expert Solved, Explanations
and Solutions......
Computec (Pty) Ltd is a South African company with its principal place of
business in Johannesburg, South Africa. Computec manufactures and exports
computer hardware components. Technologie GmbH is a German company
with its principal place of business in Hamburg, Germany. Technologie
regularly purchases large consignments of computer hardware from
Computec. It has become standard practice between the companies that the
goods are shipped CIF (Hamburg) (Incoterms 2020). Payment is always made
by means of confirmed letters of credit, issued by Deutsche Bank (Berlin)
and confirmed by Rand Merchant Bank, (Johannesburg). The contract
contains a choice of law clause in favour of German law. During June 2023, a
dispute arose as to the quality of a shipment of computer components
received in May of that year. Technologie argued that the quality of the hard
drives received in that shipment, were not of the same quality as those
received in previous orders and demanded that the hard drives be replaced.
Computec refused, arguing that the goods were in conformity with the
contract. In February 2024, Technologie instituted a claim against Computec
in the South Gauteng High Court. 1.1 Germany is a CISG contracting state.
Should the CISG be applied to the dispute between the parties? (Refer to the
applicability criteria of the CISG and your prescribed journal article on the
topic). (3)
To determine whether the CISG (United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International
Sale of Goods) should apply to the dispute between Computec (Pty) Ltd and Technologie
GmbH, we must consider the criteria for applicability of the CISG:
1. Parties' Locations:
The CISG applies to contracts for the sale of goods between parties whose places of
business are in different Contracting States (Article 1(1)(a)).
In this case, Computec is based in Johannesburg, South Africa, and Technologie is
based in Hamburg, Germany. Germany is a Contracting State to the CISG, and South
Africa has not ratified the CISG as of now. Therefore, South Africa is not a Contracting
State to the CISG.
2. Exclusion by Choice of Law:
, The contract between the parties includes a choice of law clause in favor of German
law.
Under Article 6 of the CISG, parties may exclude the application of the CISG in whole or
in part through their agreement. By choosing German law, it is likely that the parties
intended for the CISG to be excluded, since German law (as a Contracting State to the
CISG) could provide for a legal framework that aligns with the principles of the CISG.
Conclusion:
While the CISG could potentially apply under the criteria set out in Article 1(1)(a) if both parties
were in CISG contracting states, in this case, the fact that South Africa is not a Contracting State
and the choice of law clause refers to German law suggests that the CISG will not apply to the
dispute. The dispute would likely be governed by German law instead, as per the parties’
agreement.
1. Applicability of the CISG (per Article 1 of the CISG):
According to Article 1(1)(a) of the CISG, the Convention applies to contracts of sale of goods
between parties whose places of business are in different contracting states.
Germany is a CISG contracting state.
South Africa is not a CISG contracting state.
So, at first glance, Article 1(1)(a) does not apply.
However, Article 1(1)(b) provides that the CISG may still apply when the rules of private
international law lead to the application of the law of a Contracting State.
In this case:
The contract includes a choice of law clause in favour of German law.
Since German law includes the CISG, this means the CISG is incorporated through
the choice of law.
Therefore, via Article 1(1)(b), the CISG applies to this dispute.
🔹 2. Prescribed Journal Article Perspective:
