Search for cases

CISG-online number
2749
Case name
Ideal Bike Corp. v. IMPEXO spol. s r.o.
Jurisdiction
Czech Republic
Court
Nejvyšší soud České republiky (Supreme Court of the Czech Republic)
Judges
JUDr. Ing. Pavel Horák, Ph.D. (Presiding Judge), JUDr. Kateřina Hornochová (Judge), JUDr. Zdeněk Des (Judge)
Date of decision
17 December 2013
Case nr./docket nr.
23 Cdo 1308/2011
Claimant 1
Name
Ideal Bike Corporation
Place of business
Taiwan
Role in transaction
Seller
Respondent 1
Name
IMPEXO spol. s r.o.
Place of business
Czech Republic
Role in transaction
Buyer
Case History
Ideal Bike Corp. v. IMPEXO spol. s r.o.
Městský soud v Praze (Municipal Court Prague)
Czech Republic, 24 June 2009 – 8 Cm 168/2007-58, CISG-online 3569
Ideal Bike Corp. v. IMPEXO spol. s r.o.
Městský soud v Praze (Municipal Court Prague)
Czech Republic, 09 June 2010 – 8 Cm 168/2007-99, CISG-online 3570
Ideal Bike Corp. v. IMPEXO spol. s r.o.
Vrchní soud v Praze (Court of Appeal Prague)
Czech Republic, 19 November 2010 – 8 Cmo 304/2010-127, CISG-online 3572
Present decision reversing and remanding
Ideal Bike Corp. v. IMPEXO spol. s r.o.
Městský soud v Praze (Municipal Court Prague)
Czech Republic, 09 February 2018 – 8 Cm 168/2007-274, CISG-online 5963
granting claim
Ideal Bike Corp. v. IMPEXO spol. s r.o.
Vrchní soud v Praze (Court of Appeal Prague)
Czech Republic, 29 July 2019 – 6 Cmo 173/2018-303, CISG-online 6657
affirming
Ideal Bike Corp. v. IMPEXO spol. s r.o.
Nejvyšší soud České republiky (Supreme Court of the Czech Republic)
Czech Republic, 27 March 2020 – 23 Cdo 280/2020, CISG-online 6972
declaring appeal inadmissible
Seller 1
Name
Ideal Bike Corporation
Place of business
Taiwan
Role in trade
Manufacturer of the goods sold
Buyer 1
Name
IMPEXO spol. s r.o.
Place of business
Czech Republic
Category of goods
78: Road vehicles (including air-cushion vehicles)
Goods as per contract
Bicycles
Price
86'808.58 USD (U.S. Dollar)
CISG applicable
yes, Art. 1(1)(a)
CISG applied
yes
Key CISG provisions interpreted and applied
Art. 13; Art. 96
Key CISG provisions applied
Art. 1(1)(b); Art. 4(a); Art. 11; Art. 12
CISG provisions also cited
Art. 6; Art. 8(3); Art. 9; Art. 18; Art. 19(1); Art. 19(3); Art. 66-69; Art. 101
Relevant CISG provisions not cited
Art. 95
Non-provision-specific issues addressed
Status of Taiwan under the CISG
This decision cites the following CISG-AC Opinion 1
This decision is cited by 1
ZEVETA Bojkovice, a.s. v. FAGOR ARRASATE S. COOP
Nejvyšší soud České republiky (Supreme Court of the Czech Republic)
Czech Republic, 16 May 2019 – 23 Cdo 3439/2018, CISG-online 5670
CLOUT number
1450
Full text, translation and abstract of decision 3
Full text of decision
Translation of decision