How to effectively avoid foreign trade disputes has become a top priority for many foreign trade companies in trade practice. Because once a dispute occurs, it is involved in an endless war of words, which consumes a lot of manpower and material resources, not to mention that in the market economy, time is money.
The disputes between the foreign trade parties in the trade process are often caused by the unclear quality clauses in the foreign trade contract. So both sides took a vague contract and got involved in the disputed defense station. But in fact, for foreign trade companies, both parties to the trade can strictly clarify each other's obligations and powers when the contract is signed, and clarify the quality clauses in the contract, thus "dissolving the dispute in the cradle."
Dispute case:
Company A (a clothing trading company in Guangzhou, China) and Company B (a clothing company in New York, USA) traded on the sale of clothing. One month later, after Company A shipped the goods to the designated port of destination of Company B, Company B also received the goods provided by Company A. According to the foreign trade contract provisions of both parties, Company B shall pay by T/T.
Surprisingly, Company B did not pay the relevant funds in time. In this regard, Company A had to send a fax to Company B several times, urging that Company B should pay the money in time according to the contract, but Company B remained silent, neither paying nor any reason.
Under this premise, Company A again sent a fax to Company B, and made it clear that according to the contents of the contract, if it does not pay within 10 days, Company A will pursue the compensation liability of Company B according to the relevant provisions of the foreign trade contract. At this time, Company B responded. The reason for not paying was that the quality of the goods provided by Company A did not meet the requirements. Now the company's next company proposed that the quality of the goods had serious quality problems and requested Company B to pay compensation. Responsibility and more.
At the same time, Company B stated that if Company B’s next family legally requires Company B to assume liability for compensation, then the compensation for this part will be borne by Company A and so on.
Here, we are not making any comment on the question of who is the right and wrong of the two companies, because this issue must also be judged according to the actual situation of the two companies. Here, what we want to analyze is how to make such a dispute and analyze the quality of goods in the entire trade link. As for the case, the occurrence of disputes will inevitably affect the fundamental interests of both parties. Of course, there are indeed many bad companies that do have quality problems and similar disputes occur, but more often because of the foreign trade contract between the two parties. The representation of the quality clause is not clear enough to cause controversy.
It should be said that the quality clause is the more important clause in the foreign trade contract, the quality of the goods will determine the specific price of the goods, and it is also the basis of the foreign trade contract. Therefore, in a foreign trade contract, it is necessary to clarify the quality of the product, the time and place of determining the quality of the product, and the way in which the quality is problematic.
Revelation:
The contractual spirit of trade must be fully reflected in the practice of foreign trade, and the quality rules in the contract generally follow the following methods:
First, the general representation of the quality of goods is mainly the following:
Quality complaints must be timely
In the process of foreign trade, after both parties have made clear provisions on the quality of goods, once the trade party finds that there is a problem with the quality of the goods, it should also raise objections to the other party in a timely manner.
Otherwise, it will also harm your own interests.
Dispute case:
China's Company A and Indonesian Company B entered into three sales confirmations on April 26, 2003, September 2, and September 20, 2003, respectively. Company A sold T-shirts, vests, etc. to Indonesian Company B. The total amount of the three confirmations was $911,141, and the agreed payment method was D/A for 90 days. After the above-mentioned confirmation letter was signed, Company A fully fulfilled the supply obligation according to the contract, while Indonesian Company B only paid the payment of 20,000 US dollars, and the remaining payment was not paid.
Indonesia B Company argued that there are several quality problems in the T-shirts provided by Company A: the use of fabrics that have been in stock for many years; the T-shirts are lighter than the requirements of the respondent; the length of the T-shirts is too short (inconsistent with the specified size); The color of the T-shirts of the same batch was inconsistent. For this reason, Indonesian B Company had proposed a solution such as discounting the goods or returning the remaining goods to Company A, but none of them had the consent of Company A.
However, Indonesian company B did not provide the corresponding certificate. After many negotiations, there was no result. Company A filed an arbitration according to the arbitration clause in the confirmation of sale, and requested Indonesian company B: 1. The payment of the payment was 712,141 US dollars; 2. The interest of the above payment was 4,467.50 US dollars; 3. The arbitration fee in this case and The agency fee of Company A is borne by Indonesian Company B.
After the trial, the arbitral tribunal ruled that: Indonesia B Company paid the applicant the full payment and interest of USD 716,860,500. As for the lawyer's fee, the company did not provide the corresponding evidence, so the arbitral tribunal did not support it. The arbitration fee was awarded by the losing party Indonesia B. The company is fully burdened. The claims made by Indonesian company B, such as returns and discounts, are not supported.
Revelation:
1. The quality is subject to the seller's sample. Quality as per seller's sample.
2. The quality is based on the buyer's sample. Quality as per buyer's sample.
3. Buy or sell by specification, grade or standard. Sales by specification, grade or standard.
4. Good average quality. Fair average quality, (FAQ).
5. Good quality and good quality. Good merch-antable quality, (GMQ).
6. Trade by trademark or brand. Sales by trademark or brand.
7. Buy and sell by order. Sales by specification.
Second, the example of the product quality reference:
1. The quality certificate issued at the port of shipment by ____________ is the later basis.
Quality certificate by _______at loading port to be taken as final
2. Subject to manufacturer's factory inspection. Make-r's inspection in the factory to be final
3. The quality of the inspection when shipped in an independent and impartial manner shall prevail.
Quality inspected by independent public surveyor at the time of shipment to be final.
4. The seller sells the sample by sample and must ensure that the quality of the goods arrives exactly the same as the sample.
Goods sold by sample shall be guaranteed by the seller to be fully equal to sample upon arrival at destination.
5. The average medium quality at the time of shipment, based on the official average medium quality of the London Grain Trade Association.
Fair average quality at the time and place of loading shall be assessed upon the basis of London Corn Trade Association's official 's FAQ standard.
6. The quality is based solely on the sample provided by the seller on ____________.
Quality to be strictly as per sample submitted by the seller on ____________(date).
7. The seller must ensure that the delivery quality is the same as the other samples provided.
The seller shall guarantee all shipments to conform to samples submitted with regard to quality.
The focus of the dispute in this case is whether the objection to the quality of the goods proposed by Indonesia B Company can be established. The goods provided by Company A to Indonesia B are not legally inspected. Therefore, quality disputes should be dealt with according to the inspection clauses and inspection standards in the contract.
The question of whether the objection to the quality of the goods can be established involves the basis of the claim, that is, the inspection of the goods. Article 38 of the United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods states that “(1) The buyer must inspect the goods or inspect the goods by others within a relatively short period of time as practicable. (2) If the contract involves the transportation of the goods, the inspection may Postpone until the goods arrive at the destination." Article 39 (1) stipulates that “the buyer’s disagreement with the goods must be notified to the seller within a reasonable time after the discovery or acknowledgment of the discrepancy, indicating that the nature of the situation is not met, otherwise the claim that the goods do not conform to the same right is lost†.
In the three sales confirmations in the dispute, the parties did not stipulate the inspection clauses. In this case, the arbitral tribunal held that the parties should be based on the Convention and the international Judging by relevant provisions in trade practices. According to Article 19 of the Warsaw-Oxford Rules: “...If the buyer has not been given a reasonable opportunity to inspect the goods and a reasonable time for such inspection, then the buyer should not be considered to have accepted the goods. The inspection shall be carried out at the destination as stipulated in the contract of sale or at the time of shipment, and may be decided by the buyer. Within 3 days after the completion of the inspection, the buyer shall notify the seller of any matters that he considers to be inconsistent with the contract of sale. With such notice, it is convenient to buy and lose the right to refuse to accept the goods."
Therefore, in this case, Indonesian Party B accepted the goods, not only failed to notify the seller within three days after the inspection, but also failed to submit to the arbitral tribunal any inspection certificate sufficient to prove the quality of the goods. The claimed quality problem has not been tested by the relevant inspection agency. Therefore, the right to claim that the goods do not conform to the same is lost. It is correct for the arbitral tribunal to disapprove the claims, discounts and other claims put forward by the respondent.
Get the best quality Glass Hookahs from 6shisha at low prices.We have a huge collection of top quality glass hookahs in all shapes and sizes at the best available prices online. We always do our best efforts to search for the highest quality products, with emphasis on variety,ODM & OEM are available,looking forward to your cooperation.We are proud to serve our customers all around the world.
For any further questions, we'll be more than glad to help.
Glass Hookahs
Glass Hookahs,Hand Blown Glass Hookahs,Glass Hookah Shisha,Hookah Glass Bottle
NINGBO HOOKAH ARTWARE CO.,LTD , http://www.6shisha.com