CISG
SLOVAKIA

OS KN - 5Cb/235/2008en

JUDGMENT

IN THE NAME OF THE SLOVAK REPUBLIC

[slovenske znenie]

 

The District Court of Komarno, deciding by a single judge, Mgr. Peter Mezoszallasi, in the case of Plaintiff D., a.s. [Seller], with its registered office in V.M., ___, Czech Republic, …, versus Defendant P.-P., s.r.o. [Buyer], with its registered office in K. N. ___, [Slovak Republic], regarding payment of 5,848.70 Euro [Eur] with appurtenances

 

h a s   d e c i d e d   a s   f o l l o w s:

 

[Buyer] is obliged to pay [Seller] a sum of 5,848.70 Eur within three days after the judgment comes into force.

 

[Buyer] is obliged to pay [Seller] the reimbursement of costs of the proceedings amounting to 422.39 Eur, all within three days after the judgment comes into force.

 

REASONING

 By its action of 22 September 2008, [Seller] claimed before the Regional Court in Nitra its right to payment of the sum of 176,198.- Eur and right to reimbursement of the costs of the proceedings.

 

The case was assigned on 1 October 2008 by the Regional Court in Nitra to this Court having territorial and subject-matter competence to try it. Since it was not possible to deliver the order to pay abroad, the Court ordered a hearing, which [Buyer] did not attend. The Court interrogated [Seller]’s legal representative who stated that the parties have concluded a contract of sale and [Seller] delivered the goods – ammonium sulphate to [Buyer], as specified in the bill of lading. The parties agreed on a unit price of 700.- Kc per ton. [Seller] duly delivered the goods, as evidenced by the submitted bills of lading, and subsequently drew invoices, but [Buyer] failed to pay the purchase price until the due date. Therefore [Seller]’s legal representative asked the court to uphold the action and also claimed reimbursement of costs of the proceedings.

 

The court then summoned the parties to the hearing ordered on 24 February 2009. [Buyer] did not appear before the court, though he was duly summoned under sec. 48 part 2 of the Civil Procedure Code. [Seller]’s legal representative excused his absence.

 

The parties to the proceedings have concluded a contract of sale where upon purchase order of [Buyer], [Seller] delivered ammonium sulphate to [Buyer]’s premises. The goods were delivered in rail tanks. [Buyer] confirmed handing over the goods by signing the bills of lading. [Seller] then drew invoices for the purchase price but [Buyer] failed to pay them on time.

 

[Seller] invoiced the total sum of 134,190.- Czech koruna [Kc], equal to 176,198.- Slovak koruna [Sk], consisting of the sum of 52,220.- Kc for the invoice no. 20512136 for the goods delivered on 20 and 23 August 2005, sum of 25,970.- Kc for the invoice no. 20512491 for the goods delivered on 30 August 2005, sum of 27,790.- Kc for the invoice no. 20512902 for the goods delivered on 5 September 2005, sum of 28,210.- Kc for the invoice no. 20513527 for the goods delivered on 17 September 2005.

 

Under article 1(1) of the UN Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods (hereinafter referred to as the “Convention”), published in Collection of Acts as number 160/1991 Coll., this Convention applies to contracts for the sale of goods between parties whose places of business are in different States a) when the States are Contracting States; b) when the rules of private international law lead to the application of the law of a Contracting State.

 

Under article 53 of the Convention, the buyer must pay the price for the goods and take delivery of them as required by the contract and this Convention.

 

With reference to the evidence gathered, the court found that [Seller]’s claim is justified. The court refers to the validly established contractual relationship based on the contract of sale concluded by the parties to the proceedings, where upon the purchase order of [Buyer], [Seller] delivered goods to [Buyer] and drew invoice for the purchase price. [Buyer], however, failed to pay the purchase price after handing over the goods. The court therefore upheld the action in its entirety.

 

The Court ruled on the reimbursement of the costs of the proceedings with reference to sec. 142 part 1 CPC and granted to [Seller] full reimbursement of its costs, as it was successful in asserting its claim in its entirety.


Instruction: An appeal against this judgment must be filed via this court within fifteen days from its receipt.


District Court Komarno, 24 February 2009.

Mgr. Peter Mezoszallasi, Judge

left pannel book