Search for cases

CISG-online number
5140
Case name
HRC-Hainan Holding Company, LLC v. Hu
Jurisdiction
USA
Court
U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California
Judge
Thomas S. Hixson (Magistrate Judge)
Date of decision
25 February 2020
Case nr./docket nr.
19-MC-80277
CISG applicable
no
This decision cites the following CISG-AC Opinion 1
CISG-AC Opinion No. 3 ‘Parol Evidence Rule, Plain Meaning Rule, Contractual Merger Clause and the CISG’ (Rapporteur: Richard Hyland), adopted by the CISG Advisory Council at its 7th meeting in Madrid (Spain) on 23 October 2004
Editorial remark
by Till Maier-Lohmann
This is not a CISG case but concerns an application by a claimant under a CIETAC arbitration to a US District Court for subpoenas to obtain discovery under 28 U.S.C. § 1782(a). It is disputed between US courts whether this section can be applied in aid of foreign-seated commercial arbitration. The District Court for the Northern District of California held the provision to be applicable. The respondent argued that some of the documents requested ("DRs 6 and 7") were only of minimal or no relevance. Yet, the Court agreed with the applicant that no parol evidence rule exists under Chinese law, which is why the documents could be relied upon more extensively than under US law. Therefore, the court found the documents relevant. To support the lack of parol evidence rule in Civil law jurisdictions (without regard to the CISG and without the CISG being applicable), the Court cited (only) the CISG-AC Opinion 3.
Full text of decision 1
Full text of decision
Original language: English