Chicago Prime Packers v. Northern Food Trading Co.

This document is a case study on the contract dispute between Chicago Prime Packers, Inc. and Northern Food Trading Co. The case involves a contract for the sale of pork ribs and the issue of spoiled goods. The document discusses the facts of the case, international trade agreements, and relevant domestic law.

International Commercial Law
Chicago Prime Packers v. Northern Food Trading Co.
System04128

International Commercial Law
Table of Contents
Facts of the case.........................................................................................................................2
International Trade Agreements.................................................................................................2
Domestic Law............................................................................................................................3
1 | P a g e

International Commercial Law
Facts of the case
There was contract between a Colorado based company, Chicago Prime Packers, Inc. (herein
Chicago Prime) who is appellant in the case and a Canada based company, Northam Food
Trading Company (herein Northam) who is defendant in the case. The contract was to sell
1,350 pork ribs boxes by Chicago Prime to Northam from the Brookfield Farms (Brookfield),
a processing unit for meat. It is mentioned in the logs of the unit that pork ribs were in
suitable atmosphere. There was another agreement between Northam and Brown Brother’s
Trucking Company (Brown) for picking pork-ribs from the storage facility of Brookfield and
delivered it to Beacon Premium Meats (Beacon) who is Northam’s consumer. During
shipping, Beacon found that condition of ribs is not good so the Dr. John Maltby who is the
supervisor in Department of Agriculture examined the pork ribs. He said that the pork ribs
arrived at Beacon’s in spoiled conditions. Northam mentioned this to Chicago Prime, refused
to do payment for pork ribs, and because of this Chicago Prime filed the suit against Northam
for non-payment. Northam said to the court that they are not liable to pay because the pork
ribs were spoiled and were of no use to them (Anon., 2005). The District Court ruled that the
burden of proof lies in Northam and Northam was not able to prove the inspection of pork
ribs was done by Dr. Maltby was part of the said sale. District court gave its judgment in the
favour of Chicago Prime and eventually Northam appealed (August et al., 2012).
International Trade Agreements
The main international trade agreement is Contracts for the International Sale of Goods and
World Trade Organisation controls it (Anon., 1979).
Article 68 of Contracts for the International Sale of Goods says that when delivery of
products is completed then the risk also passes with it (Queen Mary University, 2019).
Article 7(1) of Contracts for the International Sale of Goods says the parties must act in
promotion of good faith and uniformity of the treaty (Bridge, 2017).
Article 8(3) of Contracts for the International Sale of Goods says that the circumstances
related to conduct of parties to the suit should be taken into consideration while finding the
actual intention of the persons in the suit (Honnold, 1979). Article 35 of Contracts for the
International Sale of Goods says that it is seller’s duty that he should deliver the goods in the
condition which was agreed in the contract.
2 | P a g e

International Commercial Law
Article 67 (1) Contracts for the International Sale of Goods says the probability of loss will
pass to purchaser when products are delivered through purchaser’s vehicle. Article 6(1) of
Contracts for the International Sale of Goods says that the purchaser will bear probability of
loss and damage or destruction to the goods.
Domestic Law
Section 2-314 of Uniform Civil says that unless the contract states otherwise, it is implied
warranty for goods’ quality are fit for the normal use (Anon., 2019).
Bibliography
3 | P a g e

International Commercial Law
Anon., 1979. The Draft Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods. The American
Journal of Comparative Law, (2-3), pp.325-44. Available at: https://www.wto.org/index.htm
[Accessed 24 May 2019].
Anon., 2005. CHICAGO PRIME PACKERS INC v. NORTHAM FOOD TRADING CO. [Online]
Available at: https://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-7th-circuit/1292134.html [Accessed 24 May 2019].
Anon., 2019. § 2-314. Implied Warranty: Merchantability; Usage of Trade. [Online] Available at:
http://www.cs.xu.edu/~osborn/main/lawSchool/contractsHtml/bottomScreens/Briefs/UCC%202-
314.%20Implied%20Warranty;%20Merchantability;%20Usage%20of%20Trade.htm [Accessed 24
May 2019].
August, R., Mayer, D. & Bixby, M., 2012. International Business Law: Text, Cases and Readings.
Pearson.
Bridge, M.G., 2017. The International Sale of Goods. 4th ed. Hardback. Available at:
http://ruessmann.jura.uni-sb.de/rw20/gesetze/CISG/cisge7.htm [accessed 24 May 2019].
Honnold, J., 1979. The Draft Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods: An
Overview. The American Journal of Comparative Law, 27(2-3), pp.223-30. [Accessed 24 May 2019].
N, S., 2015. Uniform Civil Code: Whether a Directive to Promote Unity? Rhetoric and Reality.
Journal of Civil & Legal Sciences, Available at:
http://www.cs.xu.edu/~osborn/main/lawSchool/contractsHtml/bottomScreens/Briefs/UCC%202-
314.%20Implied%20Warranty;%20Merchantability;%20Usage%20of%20Trade.htm [Accessed 24
May 2019].
Queen Mary University, 2019. Article 68. [Online] Available at:
https://qmro.qmul.ac.uk/xmlui/bitstream/handle/123456789/2090/Raymond%20CISG%20Proof.pdf?
sequence=2&isAllowed=y [Accessed 24 May 2019].
4 | P a g e