|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"Non-performance" is the term used in the UPICC and the PECL, analogous to "breach of contract" used in the CISG. A brief survey reveals that breach of contract as a unitary institution of contract law is not familiar to all legal systems. 34 The concept as such is derived from Anglo-American law. But a unitary approach is also adopted in the Romanic legal systems; there it is called non-performance. 35 To avoid plunging into a battle of conceptual issues, I will use the both terms, i.e. "non-performance" and "breach" equally in this contribution to mean that a contract is not performed as originally contracted.
The Convention uses the basic and unitary concept of "breach of contract", which may now be regarded as widely, although not yet generally accepted. Under the Convention the notion "breach of contract" covers all failures of a party to perform any of his obligations. There is no distinction between main obligations and auxiliary obligations. And it does not matter whether the obligation had its origin in the contract, in a usage or in the Convention itself. Under certain conditions a breach of contract is considered to be fundamental (Art. 25). 36 A breach of contract is always given when the objective facts of a breach have occurred, hence irrespective of whether there are grounds for exemption or not. It follows from that the term failure to perform as contained in Arts. 79, 80 (Exemption) refers to any breach of contract, which is "to be conceived here in the broadest sense of the word. Apart from late performance and non-performance it includes, in particular, non-conform[ing] performance and relates to the obligations of both the seller and the buyer". 37
On the other hand, both the UNIDROIT Principles and the PECL, where "breach" is called non-performance, set up a substantially identical definition to the CISG. In the UNIDROIT Principles, it is expressly set out in Art. 7.1.1 that: "Non-performance is failure by a party to perform any of its obligations under the contract, including defective performance or late performance." This article defines "non-performance" for the purpose of the Principles. Particular attention should be drawn to two features of the definition. The first is that "non-performance" is defined so as to include all forms of defective performance as well as complete failure to perform. So it is non-performance for a builder to erect a building which is partly in accordance with the contract and partly defective or to complete the building late. The second feature is that for the purposes of the Principles the concept of "non-performance" includes both non-excused and excused non-performance. 38 The PECL has set up a similar structure and terms for a future European Code. "Breach" is called non-performance, and occurs whenever a party fails to perform any of its obligations under the contract. As the Official Comment to the PECL makes it clear: "Under the system adopted by the Principles there is non-performance whenever a party does not perform any obligation under the contract. The non-performance may consist in a defective performance or in a failure to perform at the time performance is due, be it a performance which is effected too early, too late or never. It includes a violation of an accessory duty such as the duty of a party not to disclose the other party's trade secrets. Where a party has a duty to receive or accept the other party's performance a failure to do so will also constitute a non-performance." 39
Clearly, the difference between these two basic concepts, i.e. "breach of contract" as used in the CISG and "non-performance" in the UNIDROIT Principles or in the PECL, is not of essence. Indeed, the process of legal harmonization in global economic markets has made a further step forward when non-performance is defined in terms under it that include all failures and defects in performance, including those that are excused, and avoids terminology emphasizing breach or fault. A commentator's statement on the CISG confirms this: "Exemptions, as can be seen particularly well from the context of impediments, only lead to the removal of certain legal consequences of the breach of contract, while others continue to exist. The reason for it is a breach of contract [...] cannot be eliminated as such by way of exemptions. From this it follows that the term 'breach of contract' does not necessarily include an accusation." 40
34. For instance, German law and some legal systems inspired by it (such as Austrian and Swiss law) do not use a unitary approach. Instead they distinguish between the various causes of breach, especially between impossibility of performance, delay, and all other instances of breach; in addition, following Roman traditions, defects of individual goods are dealt with on a special basis. This system of splitting up breach of contract into several more or less separate institutions has proved to be quite inadequate in many respects because it gives rise to difficult problems of delimitation. However, under the impact of comparative law and the unification of sales law there is now a strong tendency in German academic writings to adopt the unitary approach.
35. See Ulrich Drobnig in "General Principles of European Contract Law": Petar Sarcevic & Paul Volken eds., International Sale of Goods: Dubrovnik Lectures, Oceana (1986); p. 318. Available online at ‹http://www.cisg.law.pace.edu/cisg/biblio/drobnig.html›
36. See Fritz Enderlein in "Rights and Obligations of the Seller Under the U.N. Convention on Contracts for the International Sales of Goods": Sarcevic & Volken eds., Dubrovinik Lectures (1986); p. 188. Available online at ‹http://www.cisg.law.pace.edu/cisg/biblio/enderlein1.html›
37. See Fritz Enderlein, Dietrich Maskow, International Sales Law: United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods, Oceana Publication (1992); p. 318, 320, 336. Available online at ‹http://www.cisg.law.pace.edu/cisg/biblio/enderlein.html›
38. See Comment on Art. 7.1.1 UPICC.
39. See Comment and Notes to the PECL: Art. 8:101. Comment A. Available online at ‹http://www.cisg.law.pace.edu/cisg/text/peclcomp45.html›
40. Supra. note 6.
SiSU Book Samples and Markup Examples
Viral Spiral - How the Commoners Built a Digital Republic of Their Own
David Bollier
2009
The Wealth of Networks - How Social Production Transforms Markets and Freedom
Yochai Benkler
2006
Free Culture - How Big Media Uses Technology and the Law to Lock Down Culture and Control Creativity
Lawrence Lessig
2004
CONTENT - Selected Essays on Technology, Creativity, Copyright and the Future of the Future
Cory Doctorow
2008
Eric von Hippel
2005
Free As In Freedom - Richard Stallman's Crusade for Free Software
Sam Williams
2002
Two Bits - The Cultural Significance of Free Software
Christopher Kelty
2008
Free For All - How Linux and the Free Software Movement Undercut the High Tech Titans
Peter Wayner
2002
The Cathedral & the Bazaar - Musings on Linux and Open Source by an Accidental Revolutionary
Erik S. Raymond
1999
Cory Doctorow
2008
Down and Out in the Magic Kingdom
Cory Doctorow
2003
Cory Doctorow
2008
Free Software Foundation - FSF
GPL - GNU General Public License