Case Analysis : Bunge Sa V Nidera Bv

1014 Words Oct 28th, 2015 5 Pages
The core is the evaluation if there was a condition where the position of upholding commercial certainty could be overridden by justice. The dispute is about the arguments between the Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court in Bunge SA v Nidera BV .

The Nidera BV (the buyer) entered in to a contract with Bunge SA (the seller), to buy a single batch of 25,000 metric tones of Russian milling wheat. The shipment was agreed to take place on 23-30th of August 2010. The contract incorporated GAFTA 49 . On August the 5th, Russia announced to implement an embargo for exporting agricultural goods starting from the 15th. On the 9th the seller informed about the new development and believed the contract cancelled under the Prohibition clause . On the 11th the buyer treated it as a repudiation (because the ban was not yet valid), which was agreed. The next day the sellers offered to reinstate the contract but the buyer did not agree. The buyers utilized the Default clause to claim damages for the difference between the contract and the market price on that date in question. It was $3,062,500.

GAFTA’s first tier arbitration held that the sellers repudiated. But the buyers did not suffer and the contract would have ended naturally, so no damages were awarded. The GAFTA Appeal Board overturned the decision and awarded damages due to Default clause 20(c) as it held procedure in awarding damages when Default clauses 20(a) and (b) were not met. They rejected The Golden Victory to…

More about Case Analysis : Bunge Sa V Nidera Bv

Open Document