Search for cases

CISG-online number
7066
Case name
Frigera N.V. v. D.E.C. S.r.l.
Jurisdiction
Belgium
Court
Parket bij het Hof van Cassatie/Parquet près la Cour de Cassation (Advocate General at the Belgian Supreme Court)
Judge
Stijn Ravyse (Advocate General)
Date of decision
06 June 2024
Case nr./docket nr.
C.23.0431.N
Claimant 1
Name
Frigera N.V.
Place of business
Belgium
Role in transaction
Buyer
Respondent 1
Name
D.E.C. S.r.l.
Place of business
Italy
Role in transaction
Seller
Case History
Frigera N.V. v. D.E.C. S.r.l.
Ondernemingsrechtbank Antwerpen (Commercial Court Antwerp)
Belgium, 30 March 2020, CISG-online 6949
appointing expert
Frigera N.V. v. D.E.C. S.r.l.
Ondernemingsrechtbank Antwerpen (Commercial Court Antwerp)
Belgium, 18 February 2022, CISG-online 6980
granting claim
Frigera N.V. v. D.E.C. S.r.l.
Hof van Beroep Antwerpen (Court of Appeal Antwerp)
Belgium, 28 June 2023 – 2022/AR/1126, CISG-online 7030
reversing
Present decision
Frigera N.V. v. D.E.C. S.r.l.
Hof van Cassatie van België/Cour de cassation de Belgique (Belgian Supreme Court)
Belgium, 06 June 2024 – C.23.0431.N, CISG-online 7068
affirming
Seller 1
Name
D.E.C. S.r.l.
Place of business
Italy
Role in trade
Manufacturer of the goods sold
Buyer 1
Name
Frigera N.V.
Place of business
Belgium
Role in trade
Dealer / Trader
Category of goods
8: Feeding stuff for animals (not including unmilled cereals)
Goods as per contract
Ham bones (as snacks for dogs)
Price
64'238.36 EUR (Euro)
CISG applicable
yes
CISG applied
yes
Key CISG provisions interpreted
Art. 38(1); Art. 39(1)
CISG provisions also cited
Art. 7(1); Art. 7(2); Art. 79(1)
Non-provision-specific issues addressed
Burden of proof
This decision cites the following other CISG-online cases 11
Coating for polyester fabrics case
Hof van Beroep Gent (Court of Appeal Ghent)
Belgium, 09 May 2018, CISG-online 5359
Schubert Partner v. Eierveiling Poederlee BVBA
Hof van Beroep Antwerpen (Court of Appeal Antwerp)
Belgium, 13 November 2017 – 2016/AR/1429, CISG-online 6606
Lindlmaier Motortechnik v. Dynotronics BVBA et al.
Hof van Beroep Antwerpen (Court of Appeal Antwerp)
Belgium, 26 June 2017 – 2015/AR/2441, 2016/AR/197, CISG-online 6546
McNevin Co. v. Camus Hydronics Ltd.
District Court of the State of Colorado, Arapahoe County
USA, 21 February 2017 – 2016CV30549, CISG-online 4647
Eicom Barneveld B.V. v. VN Import Co ApS
Rechtbank Gelderland (District Court Gelderland)
Netherlands, 09 December 2015 – C/05/282141 / HA ZA 15-235 / 167, CISG-online 2684
Hof van Beroep Antwerpen (Court of Appeal Antwerp)
Belgium, 15 June 2015, CISG-online 4557
Chinese wire rod case I
Handelsgericht des Kantons Zürich (Commercial Court Canton Zurich)
Switzerland, 03 April 2013 – HG100045-O/U/dz, CISG-online 2562
Antique marble sculpture case
Handelsgericht des Kantons Zürich (Commercial Court Canton Zurich)
Switzerland, 18 June 2012 – HG060451, CISG-online 2660
Lebbe International Agencies BVBA v. Schmalbach-Lubeca AG
Hof van Beroep Gent (Court of Appeal Ghent)
Belgium, 07 October 2009 – 2007/AR/2569, CISG-online 1306
Scafom International BV v. Lorraine Tubes S.A.S.
Hof van Cassatie van België/Cour de cassation de Belgique (Belgian Supreme Court)
Belgium, 19 June 2009 – C.07.0289.N, CISG-online 1963
Milk powder case
Bundesgerichtshof (German Supreme Court)
Germany, 09 January 2002 – VIII ZR 304/00, CISG-online 651
Editorial remark
by Ulrich G. Schroeter

In the present opinion, the Advocate General at the Belgian Supreme Court discusses whether the burden of proof is governed by the CISG or not.

European Case Law Identifier (ECLI)
ECLI:BE:CASS:2024:CONC.20240606.1N.8
Full text of decision 1
Full text of decision
Original language: Dutch