Abstract
This article attempts to resolve the difficult question of whether one may invoke the hardship provisions of the UNIDROIT Principles of International Commercial Contracts (Principles or UNIDROIT Principles) in order to supplement the United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods (CISG or Convention). The article first presents a highly plausible, albeit fictional, story demonstrating one context in which this issue could arise. It then briefly outlines the history of both instruments. Next, the article considers whether, as a practical matter, fundamental differences between civil law and common law systems will undermine the applicability of the Principles’ provisions on hardship. It then contemplates whether CISG is even subject to supplementation by other international instruments. Finally, the article examines the specific issue of whether CISG is subject to supplementation by the Principles’ hardship provisions.
Due to the notable lack of international case law and scholarly commentary regarding this issue, the author’s analysis focuses largely on the proper implementation of CISG’s gap-filling mechanism, Article 7, considering the legislative history of the Convention as part of that process. It is author’s hope that this article will stimulate greater debate on the subject, ultimately resulting in international agreement on the issue.
Recommended Citation
Slater, Scott D.
(1998)
"Overcome by Hardship: The Inapplicability of the Unidroit Principles' Hardship Provisions to CISG,"
Florida Journal of International Law: Vol. 12:
Iss.
2, Article 2.
Available at:
https://scholarship.law.ufl.edu/fjil/vol12/iss2/2