El valor de los Incoterms para precisar el juez del lugar de entrega

The art. 5.1.b) of Council Regulation (EC) Nº 44/2001 of 22 December 2000 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters states that have jurisdiction to hear in disputes arising from a contract of the sales of goods the courts of «the place of deliv... Deskribapen osoa

Egile nagusia: Castellanos Ruiz, Esperanza
Formatua: Artikulua
Hizkuntza: Gaztelania
Argitaratua: Universidad Carlos III: Área de Derecho Internacional Privado. Universidad Carlos III de Madrid. 2012
Gaiak:
art
5
1
art
art
5
1
art
Sarrera elektronikoa: http://dialnet.unirioja.es/servlet/oaiart?codigo=4183599
Etiketak: Erantsi etiketa bat
Etiketarik gabe, Izan zaitez lehena erregistro honi etiketa jartzen!
Azalaren irudirik gabe QR Kodea
Gorde:
Laburpena: The art. 5.1.b) of Council Regulation (EC) Nº 44/2001 of 22 December 2000 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters states that have jurisdiction to hear in disputes arising from a contract of the sales of goods the courts of «the place of delivery», «under the contract», as «the place of performance of the obligation in question». Incoterms provide and fix clearly the place of delivery of goods depending on Incoterms used, so the STJUE of 9 June 2011, in the case Eurosteel Europe, have been used to determine the competent court. The most serious problem arises when the parties do not compromise the delivery location. In this case, we study the various possible solutions to determine the place of delivery: Incoterms, United Nations Convention on the International Sale of Goods of April 1980, Rome I Regulation..., and possible legal consequences. Not forgetting that Incoterms also have been used as Lex contractus.