The Parol Evidence Rule and the CISG: A Comparative Analysis

2523 10 72760 2 2414913 document 72760 lightbox.jpg image/png bd979e21915a85d4165e973769ce7b05 MD5 61712 2020-10-28 22:09:39 https://vuir.vu.edu.au/2523/2/lightbox.jpg 2523 2 2 image/png other Thumbnails conversion from text to thumbnail_lightbox en staffonly

lightbox.jpg

preview.jpg

medium.jpg

small.jpg

http://eprints.org/relation/isVersionOf https://vuir.vu.edu.au/id/dark_document/72759 http://eprints.org/relation/isVolatileVersionOf https://vuir.vu.edu.au/id/dark_document/72759 http://eprints.org/relation/issmallThumbnailVersionOf https://vuir.vu.edu.au/id/dark_document/72759 archive 664 disk0/00/00/25/23 2011-06-03 04:34:03 2021-08-27 07:43:38 2011-06-03 04:34:03 article show 1 Zeller Bruno Zeller, Bruno The Parol Evidence Rule and the CISG: A Comparative Analysis pub FOR_2008_180100 Law ResPubID5832, CISG, parol evidence rule, contracts, common law, business This paper will argue that globalisation of trade and hence the birth of international uniform laws has brought about changes in substantive law which need to be recognised by municipal systems. Specifically the parol evidence rule in common law will be put increasingly under pressure. It is argued that the sacred cows of common law namely the inadmissibility of evidence of a pre-contractual nature and hence the subjective intent of parties are outdated and change is required. As Lord Steyn in an address to the University of Sydney pointed out; the common law is possibly swimming against the tide. However changes are needed specially the inclusion and admissibility of subsequent conduct. The CISG has recognised that business people do not understand rules which exclude considerations on how the parties interpret their contracts. This paper will highlight that contracts are based on bargain and exchange. The classical theory which suggests that contracts for a homogenous product, concluded between two strangers who transact in a perfect spot market is outdated and wrong. As a result of the conflict between article 8 of the CISG and the parol evidence rule the outcome of litigation will yield possibly a different result as seen in recent US cases such as in MCC-Marble Ceramic Center Inc v Ceramica Nuova D'Agostino, SPA. However it is recognised that the common law has tools, such as rectification, which will bring about similar results as under the CISG. The time has come for the common law to slowly change and embrace international trends. 2003 published University of South Africa, Institute of Foreign and Comparative Law http://www.cisg.law.pace.edu/cisg/biblio/zeller6.html 72759 2 2414910 dark_document 72759 Zeller Bruno.pdf application/pdf fdf9a44be287de45b21d76bbcdaae353 MD5 44930 2020-10-28 22:09:11 2523 1 1 application/pdf text Generic Permission Form en staffonly

Zeller Bruno.pdf

other none Comparative and International Law Journal of Southern Africa 36 3 308-324 TRUE 0010-4051 http://www.unisa.ac.za/default.asp?Cmd=ViewContent&ContentID=14952 http://www.cisg.law.pace.edu/cisg/biblio/zeller6.html Includes bibliographical references FALSE