OS BR - 7Cb/102/2008en



[slovenske znenie]


The District Court of Brezno, deciding by a single judge, JUDr. Alica Gavalcova, in the case of Plaintiff L. S. š.p., [Seller], with its registered office in B.B., [Slovak Republic], ..., versus Defendant G.B.W., s.r.o. [Buyer], with its registered office in P. X., Czech Republic ___, , regarding payment of 28,850.08 Euro [Eur] with appurtenances


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


I. [Buyer] is obliged to pay [Seller] 28,850.08 Eur and interest of 13 % annually on this sum for the period of 1 September 2005 until payment and a sum of 1,730.93 Eur as reimbursement of the court charges, all within three days after the judgment comes into force.


II. [Buyer] is obliged to pay to [Seller]’s legal representative the reimbursement of costs of the proceedings in the sum of 1,484.69 Eur, all within three days after the judgment comes into force.




[Seller] claimed, by its action filed with the court on 22 May 2008, its right to payment of 869,137.- Eur as the purchase price for goods, coniferous timber, as specified by the contract of sale no. X concluded under sec. 409 et seq. of the Commercial Code on 12 July 2005.


Under the contract, [Seller] was obliged to deliver to [Buyer] the goods specified in article II of the contract and transfer title to the goods. [Buyer] was obliged to pay the purchase price, as prescribed in the contract.


As evidenced by the submitted documents, [Seller] delivered the goods duly and on time, but [Buyer] failed to pay the purchase price and [Seller] therefore filed an action with the court.


[Seller] noticed by its motion from 17 October 2008 that [Buyer] entered into liquidation on 2 September 2008, i.e. three months after filing of the action, as evidenced by the [Buyer]’s record from the Companies Register, and therefore asked the court to identify [Buyer] in the following proceedings as “G.B.W., s.r.o. in liquidation”.


The Court served [Buyer] with the action and asked him to react to the action. The mail was returned as undeliverable, since [Buyer] is not operating business in the place denoted in the Companies Register.



The Court ordered a hearing and summoned the parties, where [Buyer] was served in his registered office denoted in the Companies Register. [Buyer] did not attend the hearing. [Seller] was represented at the hearing by its legal representative.

The court gathered evidence by reading the submitted documents and interrogating the legal representative of [Seller]. With reference to the evidence gathered, the court upheld the action in its entirety.


Under the contract of sale no. X of 12 July 2005, [Seller] agreed to deliver the goods specified in article II of the contract to [Buyer] and [Buyer] agreed to pay the purchase price in the amount prescribed in article IV of the contract, where [Seller] was obliged to draw invoice after delivery of the goods. The goods were considered delivered at the place where they were handed over by the first carrier for the carriage of goods. In this manner, [Seller] drew invoices totalling 869,137.48 Slovak koruna [Sk], which [Buyer] did not pay despite being urged by [Seller].


The court qualified the relationship between [Buyer] and [Seller] as an international contract of sale governed by the UN Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods published as no. 160/1991 Coll. (hereinafter referred to as “Convention”). Under article 1 of the Convention, this Convention applies to contracts for the sale of goods between parties whose places of business are in different States, when the States are Contracting States, or when the rules of private international law lead to the application of the law of a Contracting State. Therefore the Court applied the Convention with reference to its article 1.


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.


Under article 59 of the Convention, the buyer must pay the price on the date fixed by or determinable from the contract and this Convention without the need for any request or compliance with any formality on the part of the seller.


Since [Seller] fulfilled its obligation to deliver the goods and transfer title to [Buyer], but [Buyer] failed to perform its obligation from the contract and from article 53 of the Convention to pay the price for the delivered goods, the court upheld [Seller]’s claim and bound [Buyer] to pay the purchase price totalling 869,137.48 Sk, i.e. 28,850.08 Eur.


The court ruled on the reimbursement of costs of the proceedings with reference to sec. 142 part 1 CPC and granted [Seller] full reimbursement of the court fee for the action and its travelling costs, as it was successful in its entire claim.


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

District Court Brezno, 21 July 2009.

JUDr. Alica Gavalcova, Judge

left pannel book