Scafom International BV v. Lorraine Tubes S.A.S.: a case review of changing circumstances under the United Nations Convention on International Sale of Goods (CISG) of 1980

• Author: Amalina Ahmad Tajudin
• Position: Universiti Sains Islam, Malaysia
• Pages: 212-225

Scafom International BV v. Lorraine Tubes S.A.S.: a case review

of changing circumstances under the United Nations Convention

on International Sale of Goods (CISG) of 1980

Senior Lecturer Amalina AHMAD TAJUDIN1

Abstract

This paper analyses the Belgium Supreme Court decision of Scafom International

BV v. Lorraine Tubes S.A.S. The case involved a contract of sale of volatile goods ie steel

tubes whereby a fixed-price contract caused it to be unenforceable because of the 70%

market price increase just before the goods were delivered to the buyer. While the seller

requested for renegotiation, for a higher contract price, the buyer refused to come to terms

with the former. The court, by virtue of the United Nations sales law, held that

renegotiation was the appropriate remedy in such a situation. In addition, the paper tests

the different possible outcomes of this decision under the English Sale of Goods Act 1979 ,

as well as the US Uniform Commercial Code. The finding of this test proves that these two

sales laws would have tackled the issue of volatile market differently from that of the United

Nations’.

Keywords: CISG, fluctuation, renegotiation, fixed-price

JEL Classification: K12, K 22, K33

1. Introduction: United Nations Convention on International Sale

of Goods 1980 (CISG) as international law of sales

The CISG is a product of more than two generations of international

negotiation, and was unanimously approved by delegations representing 62

national legal systems at a diplomatic conference convened by the United Nations

General Assembly in Vienna in 1980.2 Its final text was approved at a diplomatic

conference convened by the United Nations General Assembly in Vienna in 1980.3

The 62 nations comprised of 22 from the ‘Western developed’ countries, 11

‘socialist regimes’ and 29 third world countries.4 The US delegates participated

actively in the discussions of the CISG, voting in favour of the final text of the

CISG.5 The US signed the CISG on August 31, 1981, and subsequently on

September 21, 1983, the US President requested for the advice and consent of the





1 Amalina Ahmad Tajudin – Universiti Sains Islam, Malaysia, amalina@usim.edu.my

2 Paul Amato, U.N. Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods-The Open Price

Term and Uniform Application: An Early Interpretation by the Hungarian Courts, 13 ‘Journal of

Law and Commerce’ (1993) 1-29, 2.

3 Alejandro M Garro, Reconciliation of Legal Traditions in the U.N. Convention on Convention for

the International Sale of Goods 23 ‘International Lawyer’ (1989) 443-48, 444.

4 Ibidem.

5 Ibidem 445.