Search for cases

CISG-online number
2515
Case name
Feinbäckerei Otten GmbH & Co. KG v. Rhumveld Winter & Konijn B.V.
Jurisdiction
Netherlands
Court
Gerechtshof Den Haag (Court of Appeal The Hague)
Judges
E.J. van Sandick (Presiding Judge), A.R. van de Veen (Judge), C.J.J.C. van Nispen (Judge)
Date of decision
22 April 2014
Case nr./docket nr.
200.127.516-01
Claimants 2
Name
Feinbäckerei Otten GmbH & Co. KG
Place of business
Germany
Role in transaction
Buyer
Name
HDI-Gerling Industrie Versicherung AG
Place of business
Germany
Role in transaction
Buyer's insurer
Respondent 1
Name
Rhumveld Winter & Konijn B.V.
Place of business
Netherlands
Role in transaction
Seller
Case History
Feinbäckerei Otten GmbH & Co. KG v. Rhumveld Winter & Konijn B.V.
Rechtbank Rotterdam (District Court Rotterdam)
Netherlands, 20 March 2013 – C/10/412324 / HA ZA 12-978, CISG-online 2424
Present decision reversing and remanding
Seller 1
Name
Rhumveld Winter & Konijn B.V.
Place of business
Netherlands
Buyer 1
Name
Feinbäckerei Otten GmbH & Co. KG
Place of business
Germany
Role in trade
Producer purchasing the goods as supplies for production purposes
Category of goods
5: Vegetables and fruit
Goods as per contract
12,000 dried apple rings
CISG applicable
yes
CISG applied
yes
Key CISG provisions interpreted and applied
Art. 7(1); Art. 8(2) (incorporation of standard terms into CISG contract)
Key CISG provisions applied
Art. 8(3); Art. 9; Art. 14; Art. 18
This decision cites the following other CISG-online cases 6
Grootscholten v. Vergo Kwekerjien B.V.B.A.
Hoge Raad (Dutch Supreme Court)
Netherlands, 28 January 2005 – C03/290HR, CISG-online 1002
Deforche NV v. Prins Gebroeders Bouwstoffenhandel BV
Hof van Beroep Gent (Court of Appeal Ghent)
Belgium, 04 October 2004 – 2003/AR/2763, CISG-online 985
Tantalum powder case I
Oberster Gerichtshof (Austrian Supreme Court)
Austria, 17 December 2003 – 7 Ob 275/03x, CISG-online 828
Machinery case
Bundesgerichtshof (German Supreme Court)
Germany, 31 October 2001 – VIII ZR 60/01, CISG-online 617
Propane gas case
Oberster Gerichtshof (Austrian Supreme Court)
Austria, 06 February 1996 – 10 Ob 518/95, CISG-online 224
Gantry S.A. v. Research Consulting Marketing
Tribunal de Commerce de Nivelles (Commercial Court Nivelles)
Belgium, 19 September 1995 – 1707/93, CISG-online 366
This decision cites the following CISG-AC Opinion 1
This decision is cited by 9
[…] AG v. Insoluble Anode Technology (IAT) B.V.
Rechtbank Oost-Brabant (District Court Oost-Brabant)
Netherlands, 30 October 2024 – C/01/396482 / HA ZA 23-573, CISG-online 7203
Aqua-Vrijsen Algemene Aanneming BVBA v. Tugeo B.V.
Rechtbank Den Haag (District Court The Hague)
Netherlands, 09 August 2023 – C/09/633557 / HA ZA 22-689, CISG-online 6555
[...] v. S.R.T.M.
Rechtbank Gelderland (District Court Gelderland)
Netherlands, 17 May 2023 – C/05/414640 / HA ZA 23-49, CISG-online 6333
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
ArcelorMittal Construction Nederland B.V. v. [...]
Rechtbank Gelderland (District Court Gelderland)
Netherlands, 05 April 2022 – C/05/396865 / KG ZA 21-429, CISG-online 5950
[...] v. Hollandplant B.V.
Rechtbank Rotterdam (District Court Rotterdam)
Netherlands, 31 March 2021 – C/10/595909 / HA ZA 20-437, CISG-online 5545
Berg-O-Tool Holding B.V. v. Kingspan Environmental Sp. z o.o.
Rechtbank Gelderland (District Court Gelderland)
Netherlands, 09 September 2020 – C/05/360606 / HA ZA 19-77 546 / 1496, CISG-online 5470
Garlic powder case
Rechtbank Overijssel (District Court Overijssel)
Netherlands, 23 March 2016 – C/08/158118 / HA ZA 14-330, CISG-online 2736
Silicon Refractory Anchoring Systems B.V. v. Refrattari Sirc S.r.l.
Rechtbank Den Haag (District Court The Hague)
Netherlands, 19 August 2015 – C/09/463597 / HA ZA 14-440, CISG-online 2629
Editorial remark
by Ulrich G. Schroeter

This appellate decision was rendered in a dispute between a German buyer of apple rings and his insurer (Claimants) and a Dutch seller (Respondent).

The Dutch seller had challenged the jurisdiction of the Dutch courts by alleging that the "Conditions of the Netherlands Association for the Trade in Dried Fruit, Spices and Allied Products" (NZV Conditions), which contain an arbitration clause, had been incorporated into the parties' CISG contract.

The Court of Appeal The Hague held that Arts. 8 and 14-24 CISG govern the inclusion of standard terms into CISG contracts. Following the German Supreme Court's decision in the "Machinery case" (CISG-online 617) as well as the CISG-AC Opinion No. 13, the Court of Appeal furthermore held that a party aiming at including standard terms into a CISG contract has to make the standard terms' text available to the other party, and that neither a mere reference to the terms' text being registered at a Chamber of Commerce nor an offer to send the terms' text free of charge upon request suffices in this regard.

Accordingly, the Court of Appeal concluded that the NZV Conditions had not become part of the parties' contract in the present case and affirmed the Dutch courts' jurisdiction over the dispute.

Decision published in 2
Tijdschrift voor Arbitrage (TvA) (2014), 46 [ – in Dutch]
Nederlands Tijdschrift voor Handelsrecht (NTHR) (2014), 201 [ – in Dutch]
European Case Law Identifier (ECLI)
ECLI:NL:GHDHA:2014:1341
Case identifier in the old Albert H. Kritzer Database
140422n1
Full text and translation of decision 2
Full text of decision
Translation of decision
translated by
Tanja Schasfoort