UNCITRAL CLOUT Case 944 (G & G Component Complementaries v. Errelle S.R.L.)
’s-Hertogenbosch Court of Appeals
No. C0400803/HE (2005)

- Written by Rich Walter, JD
Facts
The Italian company Errelle S.R.L. (seller) (plaintiff) contracted to sell 3,600 print boards to the Dutch company G & G Component Complementaries (buyer) (defendant). The contract called for the seller to deliver and the buyer to pay for the boards in batches. The buyer briefly examined each batch of boards as it arrived and then resold the boards to a Dutch third-party customer. The customer periodically complained to the buyer about the poor quality of some boards. The buyer spot-checked some of these complaints and confirmed that several hundred boards were defective. The buyer reported these defects to the seller, demanded that the seller improve quality control on each batch, and withheld payment until the seller agreed to replace defective boards. Eventually, however, the buyer simply stopped making payments. The seller sued to enforce its remedies under the United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods (CISG). The Dutch trial court awarded judgment to the seller. The buyer appealed to the appellate court based in the Dutch city of ’s-Hertogenbosch. The appellate court noted that the buyer gave the seller timely notice of a board’s nonconformity in only 155 instances.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning ()
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.