Regulating International Buyer-Seller Relations under English Law

This essay delves into the intricate relationship between buyers and sellers in the context of international trade under English Law. It examines how the Sale of Goods Act 1979 and the CISG regulate these relationships, highlighting their strengths and limitations. The comparison reveals that while both frameworks aim to protect parties' rights, the CISG offers broader, less technical provisions than the UK's Sale of Goods Act. Key distinctions include the flexibility in accepting partial deliveries and pre-contractual obligations under the CISG. The essay concludes by suggesting amendments to the Sale of Goods Act to enhance its efficacy in maintaining robust buyer-seller relationships globally.

Running head: MARITIME LAW
Sales and Goods Act
Name of the student:
Name of the university:
Author note

1MARITIME LAW
Introduction:
The Sales and Goods act 1979 is a subsequent version of Sales and Goods Act
18931. This Act governs the provision of the English Contract Act and UK Commercial Law
relating to the transaction of goods. The relationship between the buyer and the seller is the
main concentrating provision of this Act. According to this section, the rights and interest of
the sellers are not the only matter of fact; other relevant provisions like delivery, rights of the
third party, liabilities and different competitions are also come under the purview of this Act.
Section 12 of the Act discusses about the process how the Act maintains the relationship
between the parties in case of private sales2. This essay will describe the fact whether the Act
regulates relation between the parties in an international sale or not.
Discussion:
The international Sale of Goods is governed by the United Nations Conventions.
According to this convention, it has been observed that the liabilities of the seller and the
rights of the buyer in case of international transactions of goods are following the principle of
Sale of Goods Act 1979. However, it is important to find out the differences in between the
International Sale of Goods Act and Sale of Goods Act 1979 to understand the effective role
of Sale of Goods Act regarding the relationship in between the parties in international sale
governed by English Law. Article 32 of the Contracts for International Sale of Goods Act
(CISG) has prescribed the liabilities of the seller regarding the delivery of the goods so that
the seller could maintain all the logistic provisions of carriage3. As per the provision of this
1 Hill, Christopher, and Yash Kulkarni. Maritime law. Taylor & Francis, 2017.
2 Riefa, Christine. "Codification: The future of English consumer law?." Browser Download This Paper (2015).
3 Zareshahi, Ali. "A Comparative Study of Damages and Price Reduction Remedy for Breach of Sale Contract
under CISG, English and Iranian Laws." J. Pol. & L. 9 (2016): 126.

2MARITIME LAW
Act, it is the liability of the seller to deliver the identified goods and he needs to serve proper
notice to the buyer regarding the specific consignment. According to Article 32 (2) of the
CISG, law imposed certain duties to the seller regarding the goods carriage and the seller
needs to ensure that goods are properly delivered to the buyer. Besides, it is the duty of the
seller to provide all the security related information to the buyer. According to Butler, the
notice provision of Sale of Goods Act is stricter compared to the CISG4. It is argued by
Bridge that the provisions regarding the delivery of goods CISG re quite different from the
Sale of Good Act 19795. According to Article 31 of the CISG, delivery of goods can be made
when the same has been handed over by the seller to the carrier. In case where there is no
necessity of carriage, then the seller must make the goods available for the buyer. The
delivery related relationship between the parties is governed by the section 29 of Sale of
Goods Act 19796. Certain stipulations have been prescribed by the Act such as the goods
should be delivered within a reasonable hour. Further, if the contract is issueless, the
residence of seller can be the delivery place. The rights and interest of the buyer can be much
protected by the provisions of the Sale of Goods Act 1979. In case of any disputed goods, it is
the duty of the seller to replace the disputed product. In Hadley v Baxendale7 it has been
observed that if any of the parties will make any breach to the terms of the contract will be
faced necessary punishment. The relationship between the parties is strictly maintained by the
Sale of Goods Act 1979. The nature of the Act is reactive in nature and therefore, the buyer
can claim damage from the seller in case of any disputes related to that goods. On the other
hand, the buyer may extend the delivery time in case of unsatisfied delivery by the seller. In
4 Butler, Petra. Choice of Law. Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft mbH & Co. KG, 2016.
5 Bridge, Michael. "The UK Supreme Court decision in The Res Cogitans and the cardinal role of property in
sales law." Sing. J. Legal Stud. (2017): 345.
6 Legislation.gov.uk. N.p., 2018. Web. 5 Feb. 2018.
7 [1854] 9 Exch. 341

3MARITIME LAW
case of international sale, it has been observed CISG is more liberal to the Sale of Goods Act.
It has been observed that the applicable provisions under Sale and Goods Act for the
international relationship are quite technical and legislature centric. There is no ethical
consideration for the delivery of goods8. Christopher has argued that excessive legal
provisions have made the transaction stricter and no ethical submission has been made.
According to his statement, the terms of the contract can be positive if both the parties can
maintain certain ethical consideration. According to Article 50 of CISG, if proper
confirmation could not be made by the seller, buyer can ask for price reduction. In case of
Sale of Goods Act, the buyer has the option to repudiate the whole contract and there is no
option for ethical consideration under the Act. Further, under the Act, the buyer has no power
to decide the amount of breach of condition or breach of warranty. In Harlingdon and
Leinster Enterprise v Hull Fine Art9, it has been observed that the rights of the buyer are
strictly limited due to the technicality of the Sale of Goods Act 1979. The CISG is protecting
the parties to terminate the contract as a whole and gives many facilities to the parties to
strengthen the base of the relationship. CISG has given the buyer a right to accept a portion of
the goods under Article 51, while no such right has been provided to the buyer under Sale of
Goods Act and the buyer is restricted to accept the partial goods under section 31 (1) of the
Act.
Further, the Act has failed to provide necessary rules to the seller if he delivered
the goods before the specific dates and no duty has been imposed on him to provide
document to the buyer. However, Article 34 of CISG has stated about the duty of the seller to
hand over all the related documents to the buyer. It has been provided under Article 52 of
CISG, it is discretionary power of the buyer to accept the goods if the seller has delivered the
8 Hunter, Howard. "The Law of Sales in Singapore." (2017): 1.
9 [1991] 1 QB 564.

4MARITIME LAW
same before contracting date. Certain protections have been given to the parties after the
delivery of the goods under CISG. The buyer can ask for remedy from the seller if the quality
or quantity of the goods is not according to the criteria. On the other hand, no such power or
authority has been given to the parties under the Sale of Goods Act 1979 as the law of
estoppels has restricted the parties to do so10.
Conclusion:
It can be concluded that the objective of both Contracts for International Sale of
Goods Act or CISG and Sale of Goods Act 1979 were same that is to protect the rights and
interest of the contracting parties and maintain the relationship between the buyer and seller
in case of international contract. However, it has been observed that the provisions of the
CISG are quite wide and less technical compared to the Sale of Goods Act. The provisions of
CISG are required to entrench in this case. All these loopholes of the Act are required to be
resolved and should make the Act as promising in order to maintain a good relationship.
10 Hill, Christopher, and Yash Kulkarni. Maritime law. Taylor & Francis, 2017.

5MARITIME LAW
Reference:
Bridge, Michael. "The UK Supreme Court decision in The Res Cogitans and the cardinal role
of property in sales law." Sing. J. Legal Stud. (2017): 345.
Butler, Petra. Choice of Law. Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft mbH & Co. KG, 2016.
Hadley v Baxendale [1854] 9 Exch. 341
Harlingdon and Leinster Enterprise v Hull Fine Art [1991] 1 QB 564
Hill, Christopher, and Yash Kulkarni. Maritime law. Taylor & Francis, 2017.
Hunter, Howard. "The Law of Sales in Singapore." (2017): 1.
Legislation.gov.uk. N.p., 2018. Web. 5 Feb. 2018.
Riefa, Christine. "Codification: The future of English consumer law?." Browser Download
This Paper (2015).
Zareshahi, Ali. "A Comparative Study of Damages and Price Reduction Remedy for Breach
of Sale Contract under CISG, English and Iranian Laws." J. Pol. & L. 9 (2016): 126.