Search for cases

CISG-online number
1640
Case name
Imporgess. GmbH v. Autos Cabrera Medina, S.L.
Jurisdiction
Spain
Court
Tribunal Supremo (Spanish Supreme Court)
Chamber
Sala de lo Civil, Sección 1 (Chamber for civil matters, Section 1)
Judges
Ignacio Sierra Gil de la Cuesta (Reporting judge), Jose Antonio Seijas Quintana (Judge), Román Garcia Varela (Judge)
Date of decision
17 January 2008
Case nr./docket nr.
18/2008
Claimant 1
Name
Imporgess. GmbH
Place of business
Germany
Role in transaction
Buyer
Respondents 2
Name
Autos Cabrera Medina, S.L.
Place of business
Spain
Role in transaction
Seller
Name
Canary Island Car (CICAR), S.L.
Place of business
Spain
Role in transaction
Seller
Case History
Imporgess. GmbH v. Autos Cabrera Medina, S.L.
Juzgado de Primera Instancia No. 1 de Arecife (Court of First Instance No. 1 of Arecife)
Spain, 31 May 1999 – 214/97, CISG-online 3433
Imporgess. GmbH v. Autos Cabrera Medina, S.L.
Audiencia Provincial de Las Palmas (Court of Appeal Las Palmas)
Spain, 24 October 2000, CISG-online 3450
affirming
Present decision affirming
Sellers 2
Name
Autos Cabrera Medina, S.L.
Place of business
Spain
Role in trade
Dealer / Trader
Name
Canary Island Car (CICAR), S.L.
Place of business
Spain
Role in trade
Dealer / Trader
Buyer 1
Name
Imporgess. GmbH
Place of business
Germany
Role in trade
Dealer / Trader
Category of goods
78: Road vehicles (including air-cushion vehicles)
Goods as per contract
300 second-hand automobiles
CISG applicable
yes
CISG applied
yes
Key CISG provisions interpreted and applied
Art. 35
Key CISG provisions interpreted
Art. 25; Art. 44
Key CISG provisions applied
Art. 36; Art. 38(2); Art. 39
CISG provisions also cited
Art. 1; Art. 2; Art. 3; Art. 4; Art. 7; Art. 8; Art. 30; Art. 31 et seq.; Art. 45; Art. 46; Art. 47; Art. 48; Art. 50; Art. 51; Art. 53; Art. 54; Art. 66 et seq.; Art. 99
Non-provision-specific issues addressed
Unitary non-conformity concept of the CISG
This decision is cited by 7
Generali España SA de Seguros y Reaseguros v. TunnelTec GmbH
Audiencia Provincial de Barcelona (Court of Appeal Barcelona)
Spain, 16 March 2022 – 42/2020 / 154/2022, CISG-online 5944
Carlos Soto S.A. v. Don Emiliano
Audiencia Provincial de Pontevedra (Court of Appeal Pontevedra)
Spain, 09 November 2015 – 681/2014 / 531/2015, CISG-online 2730
Hoogendik Import/Export B.V. et al. v. Bluemarine Fish International, S.L.
Audiencia Provincial de Pontevedra (Court of Appeal Pontevedra)
Spain, 06 October 2014 – 251/2013 / 569/2014, CISG-online 2576
IPSA S.p.A. v. Canadire S.L.
Audiencia Provincial de Las Palmas (Court of Appeal Las Palmas)
Spain, 16 February 2012 – 740/2010 / 70/2012, CISG-online 2516
M-A-M Ltd. v. Dana Automacion, S.A.
Audiencia Provincial de Navarra (Court of Appeal Navarra)
Spain, 30 July 2010 – 175/2008 / 169/2010, CISG-online 2315
Changzhou Quality Flag Industry Co. Ltd. v. Sosa Dias, S.A.
Audiencia Provincial de Madrid (Court of Appeal Madrid)
Spain, 14 July 2009 – 61/2009, CISG-online 2087
Changzhou Quality Flag Industry Co. Ltd. v. Sosa Dias, S.A.
Juzgado de Primera Instancia e Instrucción No. 1 de Colmenar Viejo (Court of First Instance No. 1 of Colmenar Viejo)
Spain, 23 July 2008, CISG-online 3793
CLOUT number
802
Case identifier in the old Albert H. Kritzer Database
080117s4
Comments on this decision 2
Nieves Fenoy Picón, 'Sentencia de 17 de enero de 2008: compraventa internacional de vehículos automóviles de segunda mano: aplicación de la Convención de Viena de 11 de abril de 1980; no hay falta de conformidad; no denuncia en plazo de la falta de conformidad (comparación con la denuncia del TRLGDCU y otros modelos de Derecho privado europeo): desestimación de la indemnización solicitada por el comprador; descripción del sistema de la Convención de Viena de la falta de conformidad de la mercadería', 78 Cuadernos Civitas de Jurisprudencia Civil (2008), 1299–1339 [– in Spanish]
Djakhongir Saidov, 'Article 35 of the CISG: Reflecting on the Present and Thinking about the Future', 58 Villanova Law Review (Vill. L. Rev.) (2013), 529–552, at 532 [– in English]  
Full text and abstract of decision 2