仲裁裁决书中英对照

1、仲裁裁决书中英对照仲裁裁决书中英对照双方当事人：(1)申诉方/反诉被诉方：卖方(2)被诉方/反诉申诉方：买方Parties :(1) Claimant/counter-defendantSeller(2) Defendant/Counter-claimantBuyer仲裁地：Place of arbitration事实FACTSxx年，双方当事人根据莫种协议规格规定签署了3份买卖一种产品的合同。在收到货运单据后，买方即按合同规定， 支付了全部合同价的90%.In xx , the parties concluded three contracts for the sale of a produ

2、ct according to certain contract specifications. The buyer paid 90% of the price payable under each of the contracts upon presentation of the shipping documents ， as contractually agreed.按第一和第三份合同提供的产品符合协议规格，第二批货 物的规格在装运前就有过争议。产品抵达目的地后重新检验， 发现其不符合协议规格。为便于脱手，经过莫种处理，最终买 方将产品卖给了第三方，损失惨重。The product del

3、ivered pursuant to the first and third contracts met the contract specifications. The conformity of the second consignment was dispute prior to its shipment. When the product was again inspected upon arrival , it was found that it did not meet the contract specifications. The product was eventually

4、sold by the buyer to third parties at considerable loss ， after having undergone a certain treatment to make it more saleable.卖方提请仲裁，要求收回 10%勺合同余款。买方提起反 诉，声称应从卖方所索费用中扣除买方估计应由卖方赔偿买方 的一笔费用，即：直接损失费、财务成本费、所损失的利润及 利息费。The seller initiated arbitration proceedings to recover the 10% balance remaining due u

5、nder the contracts. The buyer filed a counterclaim alleging that the seller's claim should be set off against theamounts which the buyer estimates to be payable to the buyer by the seller , i.e. , the direct losses , financing costs , lost profits and interest.一、适用的法律I. APPLICABLE LAW(1) 鉴于合同未含有

6、关实体法的任何条款，故法律问题 应根据国际商会仲裁规则第 13条第3款决定。根据该条规 则，仲裁员们应适用它们认为适合的法律冲突规则所规定的准 据法则。(2) The contract contains no provisions regarding the substantive law. Accordingly that law has to be determined by the Arbitrators in accordance with Art. 13(3) of the ICC rules. Under thatarticle , the Arbitrators will app

7、ly the law designated as the proper law by the rule of conflicts which they deem appropriate.(2)这是一个由不同国际的卖方和买方签署的在第三国 交货的合同。买卖规定为船上交货，故风险在卖方所在国便转 给了卖方。由此，卖方所在国似乎就成为与买卖关系最近的管 辖地。(3) The contract is between a Seller and a Buyer(of different nationalities) for delivery (in athird country ) 。 The sale

8、was f.o.b. so that thetransfer of risks to the Buyer took place in(thecountry of Seller ) 。(The country of Seller )accordingly appears as being the jurisdiction to which the sale is most closely related.(3)有关国际货物买卖适用法律的xx年6月15日海牙公约在涉及销售合同时，将卖方现行居住地法律视为占支 配地位的法律。买方所在国加入了海牙公约，卖方所在国 则没有。尽管如此，法律冲突法的总趋势却

9、是适用合同主要业 务的债务人现行所在地的国内法。在销售合同中，此债务人为 卖方。基于这些因素，卖方所在国的法律似乎便成了规定买卖 双方之间合同的准据法。(4) The Hague Convention on the law applicableto international sales of goods dated 15 June xx(Art.3) regarding sales contracts , refers as governinglaw to the law of the Seller's current residence.(The country of the Bu

10、yer ) has adhered to the Hague convention , not (the country of the Seller )。However, the general trend in conflicts of law is toapply the domestic law of the current residence of the debtor of the essential undertaking arising under the contract. That debtor in a sales contract is the Seller. Based

11、 on those combined findings ,(the lawof the country of the Seller ) appears to be the proper law governing the Contract between the Seller and the Buyer.(4)至于卖方所在国法律的适用规则，仲裁员们依据的 是双方当事人各自陈述的理由，以及仲裁员们从一位独立咨询 人处所得的信息。根据国际商会仲裁规则第13条最后一段之规定，仲裁员们也将考虑相关的贸易惯例。As regards the applicable rules of(the law ofth

12、e country of the Seller ) , the Arbitrators have relied on the Parties' respective statements on the subject and on the information obtained by the Arbitration from an independent consultant. The Arbitrators , in accordance with the last paragraph of Art. 13 of the ICC rules , will also take int

13、o account the relevant trade usage.二、反诉的可受理性II. ADMISSIBILITY OF THE COUNTERCLAIM(5)仲裁庭认为，xx年4月11日的关于国际货物销 售的联合国公约(通称维也纳公约)是现行贸易惯例的 最好渊源，即使买卖双方所在国均不是公约的成员国，倘若买 卖双方所在国均为公约成员国，在本案中，该公约不仅可考虑 作为贸易惯例适用，而且还可作为法律适用(5) The Tribunal finds that there is no better source to determine the prevailing trade usage

14、 than terms of the United Convention on the International Sale of Goods of 11 April xx , usually called the Vienna Convention. This is also even though neither(the country of the Buyer ) nor (the country of the Seller ) are parties to that Convention. If they were , the Convention might be applicabl

15、e to this case as a matter of law and not only as reflecting the trade usage.(6)维也纳公约已在 17个国家生效，考虑用它适 用于国际货物销售中的不符规格事项有通用惯例，应属合情合 理。维也纳公约第 38条第1款规定买方负有“当场检查 或叫人检查货物”的责任。买方应在注意或应当注意到瑕疵后 的合理期限内通知卖方货物不符合合同的规格；否则，他将丧失就上述不符规格而提起索赔的权利。第 39条第1款具体规 定道：“如买方在交货后两年之内没有通知卖方，无论如何，买 方都将丧失在货物不符规格问题上的申诉权利，除非此种不符 规格

16、构成了对长期担保的违背”。(6) The Vienna Convention , which has been given effect to in 17 countries , may be fairly taken to reflect the generally recognized usage regarding the matter of the non-conformity of goods on international sales. Art. 38(1) of the Convention puts the onus onthe Buyer toa examine the g

17、oods or cause them to beexamined promptly " 。 The buyer should then notify the Seller of the nonconformity of the goods within a reasonable period as of the moment he noticed or should have noticed the defect ; otherwise he forfeits his right to raise a claim based on the said nonconformity. Ar

18、t. 39(1) specifies in the respectthat :“In any event the buyer shall lose the rightto rely on a lack of conformity of the goods if he has not given notice thereof to the seller within a period of two years from the date on which the goods werehanded over , unless the lack of conformity constituted a

19、 breach of guarantee covering a longer period. ”(7)本案中，买方在合理的期限内已对货运作过检查， 因为在货物抵达之前，一位专家曾被请去检查过装船。买方也 应被认定在合理的期限内，即在专家报告公布后的8天内，就产品瑕疵作过通报。(7) In the circumstances , the Buyer had the shipment examined within a reasonable time-span since (an expert ) was requested to inspect the shipment even before

20、the goods had arrived. The Buyer should also be deemed to have given notice of the defects within a reasonable period , that is eight days after the expert's report had been published.(8)仲裁庭认为，就本案情况而言，买方遵守了上述 维也纳公约的要件规定。这些要件要比卖方所在国的法律 的规定灵活许多。卖方所在国法律所规定的买方通知卖方的时 限特别短，特别具体，在这点上，似乎是通用的贸易惯例的一 种例外。(8) The Tribunal finds that , in the circumstances of the case , the Buyer has compliedwith the above-mentioned requirements of the Vienna Convention. These requirements are considerably more fle