Parties' right to withhold performance under the CISG
While Art. 58 CISG generally stipulates the possibility for the seller to withhold performance if the buyer is unwilling to pay concurrently after he had a possibility to inspect the goods under Art. 58(3) CISG, some courts have interpreted the CISG to contain further possibilities to withhold performance:
Glass recycling machine case
Oberster Gerichtshof (Austrian Supreme Court)
Austria, 08 November 2005 – 4 Ob 179/05k, CISG-online 1156
Oberster Gerichtshof (Austrian Supreme Court)
Austria, 08 November 2005 – 4 Ob 179/05k, CISG-online 1156
According to a general principle underlying the Convention (Art. 7(2) CISG) that is inter alia expressed in Arts. 58(3), 71, 80, 85 and 86 CISG, each party has a right to withhold its performance until the other party is willing to perform its obligations
Shoe leather case
Sąd Najwyższy (Supreme Court of Poland)
Poland, 11 May 2007 – V CSK 456/06, CISG-online 1790
Sąd Najwyższy (Supreme Court of Poland)
Poland, 11 May 2007 – V CSK 456/06, CISG-online 1790
Under the Convention, a party deprived of what he can expect under the contract has a general right to withhold performance in order to force another party to perform promptly; such a rule is supported by the rules of good faith and righteousness (following the decision of the Austrian Supreme Court in the Glass recycling machine case, CISG-online 1156, and the CISG-AC Opinion No. 5)
Minibuses case
Rechtbank Arnhem (District Court Arnhem)
Netherlands, 29 July 2009 – 172927 / HA ZA 08-1230, CISG-online 1939
Rechtbank Arnhem (District Court Arnhem)
Netherlands, 29 July 2009 – 172927 / HA ZA 08-1230, CISG-online 1939
Following the Austrian Supreme Court regarding a broad right to withhold its performance until the other party is willing to perform its obligations, the court found the suspension of the buyer's obligation to pay due to a non-conformity under a prior contract rightful
"Bio Suisse" certified organic juices and oils case
Handelsgericht des Kantons St. Gallen (Commercial Court Canton St. Gallen)
Switzerland, 14 June 2012 – HG.2010.421-HGK, CISG-online 2468
Handelsgericht des Kantons St. Gallen (Commercial Court Canton St. Gallen)
Switzerland, 14 June 2012 – HG.2010.421-HGK, CISG-online 2468
YPF S.A. v. AES Urugaiana Emprendimientos S.A. et al.
ICC International Court of Arbitration
Arbitration, 08 May 2013 – 16232/JRF/CA (Partial Award on Liability), CISG-online 4558
ICC International Court of Arbitration
Arbitration, 08 May 2013 – 16232/JRF/CA (Partial Award on Liability), CISG-online 4558
X-ray tubes case
Bundesgerichtshof (German Supreme Court)
Germany, 21 January 2015 – VIII ZR 352/13, CISG-online 2596
Bundesgerichtshof (German Supreme Court)
Germany, 21 January 2015 – VIII ZR 352/13, CISG-online 2596
With regard to two claims based on the CISG under the same contract, a right to withhold performance can be considered to exist
Plastic labels case
Rechtbank Midden-Nederland (District Court Midden-Nederland)
Netherlands, 02 November 2016 – 4515811 AC EXPL 15-4389 KdM/1151, CISG-online 4725
Rechtbank Midden-Nederland (District Court Midden-Nederland)
Netherlands, 02 November 2016 – 4515811 AC EXPL 15-4389 KdM/1151, CISG-online 4725
The CISG does not contain a general principle that the buyer can withhold payment, if the seller delivered the goods but did not hand back the buyer's moulds that were used for production
[…] Tic. Ltd. Sti. v. Karintrad Nederland B.V.
Rechtbank Noord-Holland (District Court Noord-Holland)
Netherlands, 02 February 2022 – C/15/314669 / HA ZA 21-169, CISG-online 5798
Rechtbank Noord-Holland (District Court Noord-Holland)
Netherlands, 02 February 2022 – C/15/314669 / HA ZA 21-169, CISG-online 5798
İFS Ambalaj Tic. Ltd. Şti v. Allestpac OÜ
Harju Maakohtus (County Court Harju)
Estonia, 03 February 2022 – 2-20-10474, CISG-online 5964
Harju Maakohtus (County Court Harju)
Estonia, 03 February 2022 – 2-20-10474, CISG-online 5964
Held (in para. 33 of the decision) that the buyer does not have a right under the CISG to withhold payment of the contract price if he has been delivered defective goods, as Art. 45 CISG does not mention such a right
Cozy Casa N.V. v. Vidiled B.V.
Rechtbank Zeeland-West-Brabant (District Court Zeeland-West-Brabant)
Netherlands, 03 August 2022 – C/02/383574 / HA ZA 21-149, CISG-online 5974
Rechtbank Zeeland-West-Brabant (District Court Zeeland-West-Brabant)
Netherlands, 03 August 2022 – C/02/383574 / HA ZA 21-149, CISG-online 5974
Felix Hartmann, 'Ungeschriebene Zurückbehaltungsrechte im UN-Kaufrecht', Internationales Handelsrecht (IHR) (2006), 181–191 [– in German]
Nory Yoshanloey Jafar, 'Le droit de rétention: Principe ou exception? Etude comparative du droit iranien et de la Convention de Vienne sur la vente internationale de marchandises (CVIM)', 121 Penant: Revue de droit des pays d’Afrique (2011), 164–199 [– in French]
Christoph Kern, 'Ein einheitliches Zurückbehaltungsrecht im UN-Kaufrecht?', Zeitschrift für Europäisches Privatrecht (ZEuP) (2000), 837–859 [– in German]
Christoph Kern, 'Les droits de rétention dans la Convention de Vienne', in: Michael R. Will (ed.), Rudolf Meyer zum Abschied: Dialog Deutschland-Schweiz VII, Geneva: Faculté de droit, Université de Genève (1999), 101–112 [– in French]
Damien Nyer, 'Withholding Performance for Breach in International Transactions: an Exercise in Equations, Proportions or Coercion?', 18 Pace International Law Review (Pace Int'l L. Rev.) (2006), 29–81 [– in English]
Wolfgang Witz, 'Zurückbehaltungsrechte im internationalen Kauf - Eine praxisorientierte Analyse zur Durchsetzung des Kaufpreisanspruchs im CISG', in: Ingeborg Schwenzer & Günter Hager (eds.), Festschrift für Peter Schlechtriem zum 70. Geburtstag, Tübingen: Mohr (2003), 291–310 [– in German]