International Commercial Chamber at Paris Court of Appeal (ICCP-CA) renders first CISG decisions

In 2018, the International Commercial Chamber at the Paris Court of Appeal (ICCP-CA) was established, in an effort of the French judicial administration to "adapt the French judicial system to contemporary international economic and legal issues". A similar chamber was established at a court of first instance, the Paris Commercial Court (ICCP-CC).

The ICCP-CC and ICCP-CA are no autonomous international courts. These chambers are part, respectively, of the Paris Commercial Court and the Paris Court of Appeal. The ICCP-CA is technically Division 5, Chamber 16 of the Paris Court of Appeal.

The ICCP-CA deals with appeals in disputes where international trade interests are at stake. International trade interests are at stake where the performance of an economic transaction does not occur within a single State and this transaction involves a movement of goods, services or capital across borders. Most of its current case load consists of arbitration-related procedures.

In proceedings before the ICCP-CA, the English language may be used to a significant extent, notably in the production of documentary evidence and in the oral hearings. For "judicial documents", by contrast, the use of the French language remains mandatory; in particular, judgments and orders issued by the ICCP-CA are issued in French.

However, the ICCP-CA's rules of procedure provide for a sworn translation of the ICCP-CA's judgments into English being carried out. Such translations are made available on the chamber's website and are also be included into our CISG-online case presentations as they become available.

In 2021, the ICCP-CA rendered what appear to be its first three judgments in CISG cases, which are accessible below. However, only one of these three decisions actually applies the CISG to a relevant degree: In Del Gaudio France S.A. v. Agrenfrut S.L. (CISG-online 5790), the parties had excluded the Convention's application in accordance with Art. 6 CISG, so no further mention of the CISG is made. In Greenyard Fresh France v. Banaland, LLC (CISG-online 5790), the ICCP-CA does apply CISG provisions, notably Art. 74 CISG. Finally, the judgment in Caterpillar Energy Solutions GmbH v. Allianz IARD SA et al. (CISG-online 5800) was issued in a court proceeding involving repeated discussions about the relationship between Art. 39 CISG and domestic limitation periods. The matter reaches the Court of Appeal Paris for the third time (each time being referred to a different chamber, now the ICCP-CA); in its decision, the ICCP-CA only deals with the interpretation of German domestic law on limitation of rights, but does not address the CISG.