This paper aims to explore the way in which informational asymmetries between the two parties to a contract for the sale of goods are dealt with under two legal regimes designed…
Abstract
Purpose
This paper aims to explore the way in which informational asymmetries between the two parties to a contract for the sale of goods are dealt with under two legal regimes designed for transnational sales contracts: the UN Convention on the International Sale of Goods (CISG) and the proposed Common European Sales Law (CESL).
Design/methodology/approach
Having considered the different types of informational asymmetry that can exist in a contract of sale, the paper undertakes a doctrinal legal analysis of the relevant provisions first in the CESL and then the CISG to identify what, if anything, has been done to deal with informational asymmetries. The paper primarily exposes and analyses these rules and compares the approaches taken under both legal regimes.
Findings
The CESL has a more detailed set of rules which address informational asymmetries. This might be because the genesis and context of the CESL (being limited to the EU) might make it easier to agree on more extensive rules. However, the CESL has not yet been adopted.
Practical implications
A seller in a contract of sale governed by CESL will be subject to more detailed (and onerous) requirements when it comes to the disclosure of information.
Originality/value
This is a first attempt to compare the treatment of informational asymmetries under the CISG and CESL, and will be of interest to scholars of both transnational and EU private law.
Details
Keywords
This article seeks to take a critical look at the proposed Common European Sales Law (CESL).
Abstract
Purpose
This article seeks to take a critical look at the proposed Common European Sales Law (CESL).
Design/methodology/approach
The article looks at the rationales given to support the enactment of the CESL. The approach is critical in nature seeking to vet the plausibility of the rationales given for a new regulation The article also takes a critical look at the CESL's structure and trilogy of coverage – sale of goods, supply of digital content, and supply of services.
Findings
The article exposes some of the shortcomings of the CESL and the dangers to substantive private law of crafting a regulation based on political feasibility.
Research limitations/implications
The CESL as proposed offers some innovative ideas in areas of the bifurcation of businesses into large and small to medium‐sized enterprises (SMEs), as well as rules covering digital content and the supply of trade‐related services. In the end, the analysis suggests a more thorough review is needed to better understand the CESL's interrelationship with the Convention on Contracts for the International Sales Law (CISG) and EU consumer protection law.
Practical implications
Further analysis is needed and unanswered questions need to be answered prior to the enactment of the CESL into law. A practical first step would to begin with a more targeted law focused on internet trading and licensing contracts.
Originality/value
This article questions the rationales given for the enactment of an ambitious new regulation covering disparate areas of sale of goods, supplying (licensing) of digital content, trade‐related services, and consumer protection. It further questions the rationality and practicality of the creation of the designation of SMEs as types of businesses in need of extra protections not currently provided by contract law's general policing doctrines.