CC BY
12
ВЕСТНИК ПЕРМСКОГО УНИВЕРСИТЕТА. ЮРИДИЧЕСКИЕ НАУКИ 2022 PERM UNIVERSITY HERALD. JURIDICAL SCIENCES Выпуск 58
V. МЕЖДУНАРОДНО-ПРАВОВЫЕ НАУКИ
Информация для цитирования:
Tatar O. V. The Procedures for the Conclusion and Termination of International Commercial Contracts and Liability under Them // Вестник Пермского университета. Юридические науки. 2022. Вып. 58. C. 737-745. DOI: 10.17072/1995-4190-2022-58-737-745.
Tatar O. V. The Procedures for the Conclusion and Termination of International Commercial Contracts and Liability under Them. Vestnik Permskogo universiteta. Juridicheskie nauki - Perm University Herald. Juridical Sciences. 2022. Issue 58. Pp. 737-745. (In Russ.). DOI: 1017072/1995-4190-2022-58-737-7451^ШШШШЯк
УДК 341.9
DOI: 10.17072/1995-4190-2022-58-737-745
THE PROCEDURES FOR THE CONCLUSION AND TERMINATION OF INTERNATIONAL COMMERCIAL CONTRACTS AND LIABILITY UNDER THEM
O. V. Tatar
Comrat State University
E-mail: [email protected]
Received 02 Feb 2022
Introduction: the author discusses the procedures for concluding, amending, and terminating international commercial contracts, and also the responsibility of the parties to such contracts in case of evasion or unwillingness of the parties to fulfill the conditions of the concluded contracts. The article aims to study the procedures for the conclusion and termination of international commercial contracts and liability under them. The main legal means of interaction between participants in the commercial turnover is a civil contract. In the field of international commercial turnover, a civil contract acquires the features of an international commercial contract. International commercial contracts mediate the international business activities of the parties and differ from similar internal transactions, as well as from transactions that, although complicated by a foreign element, are concluded with the participation of the consumer. International commercial practice has developed a number of requirements usually imposed on the content and structure of international commercial contracts. It is concluded that international commercial contracts usually contain several sections located in a certain logical sequence, although the content and structure of contracts may vary depending on the specifics of the product and a number of other conditions.
Keywords: conclusion, modification, termination of international commercial contracts; liability of the parties under international commercial contracts
© Tatar O. V., 2022
ПОРЯДОК ЗАКЛЮЧЕНИЯ И РАСТОРЖЕНИЯ МЕЖДУНАРОДНЫХ КОММЕРЧЕСКИХ ДОГОВОРОВ И ОТВЕТСТВЕННОСТЬ ПО НИМ
О. В. Татар
Комратский государственный университет
E-mail: [email protected]
Поступила в редакцию 02.02.2022
Введение: в статье описывается порядок заключения, изменения и расторжения международных коммерческих договоров. Уделяется внимание вопросам ответственности, предусмотренной международными коммерческими договорами, за уклонение или нежелание одной из сторон выполнять условия этих договоров. Целью статьи является изучение порядка заключения, расторжения международных коммерческих договоров и ответственности по ним. Основным правовым средством взаимодействия участников коммерческого оборота является гражданско-правовой договор. В сфере международного коммерческого оборота гражданско-правовой договор приобретает черты международного коммерческого договора. Международные коммерческие договоры опосредуют международную предпринимательскую деятельность сторон и отличаются от аналогичных внутренних сделок, а также сделок, которые хотя и осложнены иностранным элементом, но заключаются с участием потребителя. Международная коммерческая практика выработала ряд требований, обычно предъявляемых к содержанию и структуре международных коммерческих соглашений. Сделан вывод, что международные коммерческие соглашения обычно содержат несколько разделов, расположенных в определенной логической последовательности, хотя содержание и структура соглашений могут варьироваться в зависимости от специфики товара и ряда других условий.
Ключевые слова: заключение, изменение, расторжение международных коммерческих договоров, ответственность сторон по международным коммерческим договорам
An international commercial contract can be concluded by drawing up one document signed by the parties. It can also be concluded by the exchange of letters, telegrams, telephone messages, telefaxes, etc. signed by the party that sends them. In this case, the process of concluding a contract begins with a proposal to enter into a contractual relationship, called an offer. The person who sends the offer is called the offeror. Consent to the proposal to conclude a contract (acceptance of the offer) is called acceptance, and the person from whom the acceptance emanates is called the acceptor. Not every proposal related to the conclusion of a contract is considered an offer. Various price lists, brochures, tariff leaflets, advertisements are not recognized as an offer. According to the norms of national legislation, the offer must contain all the essential conditions of the future contract [3, p. 39]. A contract is a legal document that is based on the consent and confidence of the parties, concluded in accordance with the requirements of the
law, not contradicting the principles of civil law, law and order and public morals, securing the will and desire of the parties [5, p. 57]. Acceptance of the offer by the person to whom it is addressed entails a completely definite legal consequence -recognition of the contract as concluded. This legal consequence can only occur if the accepted offer already contains those minimum terms and conditions that are recognized as essential by law or are necessary for contracts of this type. However, the law of different states unequally determines the terms and conditions that are essential for a particular type of contracts, including for international commercial contracts.
By the law of some states, the essential, or necessary, conditions of commercial contracts are the subject, delivery time and price (states of the Romano-Germanic system of law), while in the countries of the Anglo-Saxon system of law, to conclude such a contract, it is sufficient to agree on its subject (as for the price, if it is not agreed by the
parties, the buyer is considered obligated to pay a reasonable price). The Civil Legislation of the Republic of Moldova stipulates that the essential terms of the supply contract are the name and quantity of the goods, as well as the delivery time. Conditions such as the price and quality of the goods, as a general rule, are not significant by virtue of the law. Thus, any offer must include all the essential terms of the contract and contain the final decision of the offeror to bind himself to such a contract, subject to the acceptance of his offer. This requirement makes it possible to distinguish an offer from a call to an offer, as well as from an offer in which the person who has made it retains the right to make the final decision upon receiving a response to the offer. An essential sign of international standards is the voluntariness of the state's acceptance of obligations through the signing of an appropriate international act [4, p. 10].
According to Art. 14 of the Vienna Convention, laying down the requirements to be met by an offer to conclude a contract, in order for such an offer to be considered an offer, it must be 'sufficiently definite'. It is such if it identifies the goods and directly or indirectly sets the quantity and price or provides for the procedure for their determination. Obviously, an offer may contain other conditions in addition to the abovemen-tioned, however, in the absence of the latter, the offer will not be considered an offer leading to the conclusion of a contract if accepted by the addressee. According to part (1) of Art. 1029 of the Civil Code of the Republic of Moldova1: 'An offer is a proposal addressed to one or more persons, containing all the essential conditions of the future contract and expressing the offeror's will to be bound as a result of the acceptance of the offer'; and according to part (1) of Art. 1035 of the Civil Code of the Republic of Moldova: 'Acceptance is a statement of the person to whom the offer is addressed, or any other action indicating the acceptance of the offer. The acceptance becomes effective from the moment it is received by the offeror'.
An offer sent to a specific person must be received by the addressee of the offer based on para. (1) of Art. 15 of the Vienna Convention. It
1 Civil Code of the Republic of Moldova No. 1107-XV. Moni-torul Oficial al Republicii Moldova. 2002. Pp. 82-86. Republished in: Monitorul Oficial al Republicii Moldova. Pp. 66-75 (6989-6998).
follows from this that until the offer reaches the counterparty, it does not entail any legal consequences. In addition, until the offer is received by the addressee, the offeror himself is not legally bound by the offer made by him, which can be canceled by him. For this, it is necessary that the notification of the withdrawal reaches the offeree before or at the same time as the offer, in accordance with para. (2) of Art. 15 of the Vienna Convention.
The offer received by the counterparty may be accepted or rejected. The period of time during which the counterparty can accept the offer is fixed in the offer or is set in a specific case, taking into account the circumstances of the transaction, including the rapidity of the means of communication used by the offeror, in accordance with para. (2) of Art. 18 of the Vienna Convention. Can the offeror revoke his offer after its entry into force, but before the end of the period given to the counterparty for acceptance? In international commercial practice, a distinction is consistently made between the so-called firm (irrevocable) and free (revocable) offers. With regard to the latter, the question raised is resolved positively, and, on the contrary, a firm offer cannot be withdrawn.
The conclusion of a contract presupposes the acceptance of the offer. At the same time, the acceptance is legally present only when the response giving the consent to the offer does not contain any deviations from it. Otherwise, it is impossible to say that an agreement has been reached between the counterparties on all the issues raised in the offer. If the counterparty, while accepting the offer, makes some reservations, such a response is recognized as a rejection of the offer and at the same time as a new offer. According to para. (1) of Art. 19 of the Vienna Convention, a response to an offer intended to serve as an acceptance but containing additions, restrictions or other changes, is a rejection of the offer and constitutes a counter offer. However, para. (2) of Art. 19 of the Vienna Convention establishes that a response to an offer that aims to serve as an acceptance but contains additional or different conditions that do not significantly change the conditions of the offer, is an acceptance, unless the offeror, without undue delay, verbally objects to these discrepancies or sends a notification of this. If he does not do this, then the terms of the contract will be the terms of the offer with the changes contained in the acceptance.
The question naturally arises of what is considered a significant modification in the terms of the offer. The answer to it can be found in para. (3) of Art. 19 of the Vienna Convention, according to which additional or different terms in relation to the price, payment, quality and quantity of goods, place and time of delivery, the scope of a party's liability to the other or the dispute resolution are considered to significantly alter the terms of the offer. This clause means that if the change in its terms contained in the response to the offer affects one of the specified issues, such a modification, regardless of its content, should be considered as significant, and the reply itself - as a rejection of the offer and as a counter offer, but not as an acceptance. The list given in para. (3) of Art. 19 of the Vienna Convention is not exhaustive, but open in nature: in other words, the problem of 'materiality' of altering the terms of an offer contained in the response with its acceptance may arise in relation to any other issue not included in this list.
As a general rule, the acceptance comes into force at the moment when the consent of the addressee of the offer is received by the offeror
[1, p. 143]. However, an offer can also be accepted by performing implicit actions, if this is provided for by the offer or is applied by the parties by virtue of established practice. Such actions may include dispatch of the goods or payment of the price. In these cases, acceptance comes into force as soon as the action is performed provided that it took place within the validity period of the offer. The question of the possibility of withdrawing the acceptance seems to be crucial. The fact is that the withdrawal of an acceptance after its entry into force would constitute nothing more than a unilateral termination by the acceptor of the already concluded contract, which is recognized in principle as unlawful. Consequently, the withdrawal of an acceptance that has entered into force is generally unacceptable, and there remains only the possibility of canceling the sent acceptance before its entry into force. However, in order to have such a possibility, a time gap between the mentioned moments is necessary. If there is no such a gap (the entry into force of the acceptance is timed to the moment of its sending), the acceptor has no right to withdraw the sent acceptance.
This situation is characteristic for the states of the Anglo-Saxon system of law. The 'mailbox theory' they adopted excludes the possibility of revocation of the acceptance after it has been sent. In the countries of the Romano-Germanic system of law, the entry into force of an acceptance occurs at the moment of its arrival at the offeror, i.e., there is a gap in time between the sending of the acceptance and its entry into force, which creates the potential for the cancellation of the acceptance that has been sent but has not yet entered into force. An acceptor wishing to take advantage of this opportunity must inform the offeror of this before the latter receives an acceptance. Moldovan legislation proceeds from the fact that the acceptance becomes effective from the moment it is received by the offeror, in accordance with part (1) of Art. 1035 of the Civil Code of the Republic of Moldova. The moment of entry into force of the acceptance also determines the moment of concluding an international commercial contract.
The development of information and communication technologies has led to the emergence of new documents regulating the procedure for concluding international commercial contracts and using electronic means of communication. These documents include the 2005 UN Convention on the Use of Electronic Communications in International Contracts, previously mentioned, and ICC Electronic Terms 20041. According to the convention, when concluding an international commercial contract using the exchange of electronic messages, the time of sending an electronic message is the moment when it leaves the information system under the control of the originator or the party that has sent it on behalf of the originator, or, if the electronic message has not left the information system located under the control of the originator or the party that has sent it on behalf of the originator, the time of receipt of the electronic message.
The time of receipt of an electronic message
is the moment when it becomes possible for the addressee to retrieve it from the email address designated by the addressee. The time of receipt of an electronic message at another email address of the addressee is the moment when it becomes possible
1 ICC eTerms 2004 - ICC Guide to electronic contracting. Available at: https://documents-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/ LTD/V04/568/73/PDF/V0456873.pdf?OpenElement.
for the addressee to retrieve it at this address and the addressee becomes aware that the electronic message has been sent to this address. The ability to retrieve an e-mail by the addressee is created at the moment when it arrives at the addressee's email address. An electronic message is deemed to have been sent at the place of business of the originator and is deemed to have been received at the place of business of the addressee, as they are determined in accordance with Art. 6 and Art. 10 of the UN Convention.
ICC Electronic Terms 2004 invite the parties to an international commercial conract to include in its text the following provision aimed at ensuring the proper legal force of contractual obligations when using electronic means of communication to conclude a contract: cAn electronic message is considered to be sent or dispatched at the moment when it enters an information system that is not under the control of the sender, and received at the moment when it enters an information system specified by the addressee. If an electronic message is sent to a different information system than the one indicated by the addressee, this electronic message is considered received at the moment when the addressee learns about this message. For the purpose of this contract, an electronic communication is deemed to have been sent or dispatched at the place where the originator has his place of business and is deemed to have been received at the place where the addressee has his place of business.'
Responsibility of the Parties Under International Commercial Contracts
In the theory of private law, a consistent distinction is made between remedies and measures of responsibility in case of violation by counterparties of their contractual obligations. The main measure of liability is compensation for damages (which means real damage suffered by the defective party to the contract as a result of non-performance, improper performance or delay in performance of its obligations by the defective party), as well as the payment of a forfeit. A. A. Bessolitsyn offers the following, in his opinion, universal classification of legal remedies [2 pp. 205-218]. The author divides them into three groups. The first group comprises the means to ensure the real fulfillment of obligations. This, in particular, is the requirement for the actual fulfillment of the obliga-
tion, including the free elimination of defects in the goods and the replacement of the goods. This also includes the debtor's right to correct deficiencies in the performance of the obligation providing the violator with an additional period to correct the deficiencies as well as markdowns of the goods. The main goal achieved by the indicated means is ensuring the proper performance of the obligation in accordance with the terms of the contract. The second group includes preventive measures, inter alia the termination of the contract and the suspension of obligations. The main purpose in this case is the termination or suspension of obligations that make it possible to prevent further losses of the injured party. Finally, the third group comprises compensatory funds - compensation for losses, payment of a penalty or interest. The main goal to be achieved by such means is compensation for losses incurred by a party as a result of a breach of obligations.
Art. 45 of the Vienna Convention, which defines the buyer's powers in the event of breach by the seller of the obligations arising from the contract, does not indicate any grounds for the buyer to have the right to use remedies in the event of breach of the contract, except for the fact of breach of contractual obligations. This situation can be regarded as evidence of the reflection in the convention of a certain element of the concept of objective responsibility, which prevails in the countries of the Anglo-Saxon legal system. At the same time, the convention takes into account another approach to the issue of the grounds for liability, namely, liability based on the guilty behavior of a party to the contract that has not fulfilled its obligation. A compromise in the application of these two concepts is achieved by the introduction of provisions for exemption from liability for damages arising from default.
The seller who has not fulfilled his obligations is exempt from liability in accordance with Art. 79 of the Vienna Convention if he proves that the failure to fulfill any obligation was caused by an impediment beyond his control. In addition, in order to be exempt from liability for breach of obligation, the breaching party must prove that it not only could not have foreseen the impediment that led to non-performance when concluding the contract, but also could not have avoided or overcome this impediment. The exemption from liability es-
tablished by the convention concerns only the obligation to compensate for losses caused by nonperformance of the contract, and does not affect other remedies provided to the injured party. This point in the regulation of liability is due to the fact that conceptually the Convention is based on the provision according to which the main right to demand from the debtor the actual performance and compensation for damages is only one of the consequences of breach of a contract.
Buyer's remedies are presented in the convention as follows. If the seller violates the terms of the contract, the buyer has the right to demand from him the actual performance of his obligations, as provided in para. (1) of Art. 46 of the Vienna Convention. At first glance, such regulation seems to be similar to the position of the states of the Romano-Germanic system of law and does not comply with the rules governing the fulfillment of obligations in kind (for example, the law of the United States or Great Britain), where the requirement to fulfill the contract does not follow from the contract, but is the discretionary power of the court. However, the real significance of this provision can be assessed only in combination with Art. 28 of the Vienna Convention, according to which the right to demand performance of obligations based on the convention can be recognized by a court if it can do so on the basis of its own law in relation to such sales contracts not governed by this convention. Art. 46 of the Vienna Convention also contains another limitation on the right to demand the actual performance of the contract, namely the use by the buyer of such remedies that are incompatible with this requirement. The buyer's right to set a reasonable period for the seller to fulfill his obligations, as stated in Art. 47 of the Vienna Convention, appears to be fairly consistent from the point of view of the general approach to the grounds of liability. In this case, the buyer during this period cannot resort to other remedies. Establishing an additional period for the fulfillment of an obligation is important since, depending on the performance of the obligation by the debtor in the additional period, various consequences are envisaged.
If the delivered goods do not comply with the contract, the buyer has the right to require the seller to substitute these goods with the corresponding ones, as suggested in para. (2) of Art. 46 of the Vienna Convention. The exercise of this right by
the buyer is not possible in all cases of delivery of goods that do not comply with the contract, but only when the non-conformity of the goods constitutes a material breach of the contract. This means a violation that entails such harm to the other party that the latter is largely deprived of what it had the right to count on under the contract, unless the party in breach of the contract did not foresee such a result and a reasonable person acting in this quality under similar circumstances would not have foreseen it, according to Art. 25 Vienna Convention. At the same time, the requirement to substitute the goods must be made simultaneously with the notification of the non-compliance of the goods with the contract in accordance with the procedure and the period provided for by the convention.
An important point in regulating the consequences of breach of a contract in all legal systems is the establishment of the right of the injured party to terminate the contract violated by the counterparty. The Vienna Convention also pays great attention to this issue. According to Art. 49 of the Vienna Convention, the buyer has the right to declare termination of the contract in the case of its material violation, as defined in Art. 25 of the Vienna Convention, as well as in the case when the seller does not deliver the goods within the period specified by the buyer for the fulfillment of the obligation, or when the seller declares that he will not carry out the delivery within this period. As noted above, there is no provision in the convention establishing automatic termination of the contract if the seller violates it. Termination of the contract is allowed only upon the express application of the injured party. In this sense, it can be noted that the convention gives preference to the preservation of the contractual relationship over its termination.
Art. 45 of the Vienna Convention, which defines the remedies for the buyer, along with those listed above, provides that if the seller violates any obligation arising from the contract, the buyer has the right to claim damages. The analysis of Art. 45 allows us to argue that the buyer's right to claim damages can be exercised regardless of the use of other remedies provided for by the contract or convention, especially since for the case when the buyer terminates the contract, this issue has been resolved unequivocally, according to Art. 75 of the Vienna Convention, as well as in the case of the
seller rectifying the defects in performance within the time period established for this, based on Art. 48 of the Vienna Convention.
The Convention contains rules on the calculation of damages for violation of a contract by one of its parties in Arts. 74-77. These articles do not establish separate rules in relation to cases of compensation for losses depending on the fact of termination of the contract since the provisions on compensation for losses are of a general nature.
The amount of damages subject to compensation is determined as an amount equal to the damage suffered by the injured party due to the breach of the contract by the other party, including lost profits. The upper limit for damages is established as an action that must be performed and that may be claimed by the injured party, namely the damage that the violating party foresaw or should have foreseen at the time of the conclusion of the contract, taking into account the circumstances and factors that it knew at that time or should have known as possible consequences of the violation of the contract [6, p. 148]. Such a complex formulation reflects the desire to find a solution that would be maximally acceptable for international commercial practice, where the seller's intention to limit the amount of reimbursable damages has always been revealed under conditions of his, as a rule, absolute responsibility.
The Convention provides guidance on the methods of calculating losses that have developed as a result of many years of commercial practice. Losses of the buyer who made a purchase instead of the goods not supplied by the seller after the termination of the contract can be calculated as the difference between the contract price and the price of the goods purchased by the buyer instead. For goods for which there is a current price (for example, stock quotes), the buyer can claim, as a loss, the difference between the contract price and the price in force on the day the buyer has the right to declare termination of the contract. The non-performing party in all cases, in addition to calculating damages by the above methods, may demand compensation for any additional damages up to the limits provided for in Arts. 74-76 of the Vienna Convention. Regarding the calculation of damages, it should be noted that the party invoking the breach of the contract must take such measures that are reasonable in the circumstances to reduce
damages arising from the breach of the contract, including loss of profits. If such measures are not taken, the party that violated the contract has the right to demand a reduction in damages by the amount by which they could be reduced based on Art. 77 of the Vienna Convention.
The system of remedies for the seller in case of violation of the contract by the buyer is built in the convention from a legal and technical point of view, similar to the system of remedies for the buyer, since they are not differentiated depending on the types of violation of the contract. If the buyer fails to fulfill any of his contractual obligations, the seller may require the buyer to pay the price, take delivery or perform his other obligations, unless the seller has resorted to a remedy inconsistent with the requirements of Art. 62 of the Vienna Convention. The seller's remedies are: the right to declare the termination of the contract in the event of a significant violation or non-fulfillment by the buyer of his obligations under the contract in an additional period appointed for this by the seller, as well as the right to claim compensation for losses incurred in connection with the violation of the contract by the buyer. The rules for calculating damages set out above apply equally to cases of breach of a contract by the buyer.
Grounds for exemption from liability for nonperformance or improper performance of international commercial contracts
In the practice of considering international commercial disputes related to the impossibility of performance, two opposing points of view can be distinguished on the issue of the consequences of the impossibility of performance of the contract. One point of view is that in modern conditions of international trade, it is absolutely impossible for the parties to envisage in the contract all the circumstances that may impede its execution, and the court's attempts to see in the contractual terms the opinion of the parties regarding events that they did not think about when concluding contract are unlikely to lead to valid conclusions. Consequently, the jurisdictional authorities considering the dispute must independently decide how to most fairly distribute the losses between the parties, because the form of protection of rights must mean the clear procedure for certain activities established by law, which is carried out by competent state or public bodies, including those interested persons,
for one purpose - to restore the violated legal right, while helping to eliminate obstacles in relation to compensation, or compensation for harm caused as a result of violation of legal rights [7].
Another point of view is that due to the fact that the parties to the contract belong to different legal systems, they should rely more on the terms of their contract than on the legal doctrines of a particular country. The foregoing speaks of the importance of a unified approach to resolving issues of impossibility of execution in the field of international commercial turnover, which will undoubtedly contribute to greater stability and certainty of relations between the parties to international commercial contracts.
The issues of exemption from liability for failure to fulfill the obligations are regulated in Arts. 79-80 of the Vienna Convention. Para. (1) of Art. 79 provides that a party is not liable for a failure to fulfill any of its obligations if it proves that the failure was caused by an obstacle beyond its control and that it could not reasonably be expected to have taken this obstacle into account when concluding the contract, or to have avoided or overcome it, or its consequences. First of all, it should be noted that this provision of the convention successfully avoids the use of legal terms the content of which is differently defined in the law of individual states and the use of which would not contribute to the unification of regulation due to the well-established understanding of such terms in the judicial and arbitration practice of a particular state. However, avoiding the use of concepts contained in the law of various states, Art. 79 of the Vienna Convention, nevertheless, builds on practices in international trade. In particular, references to circumstances 'beyond the control' of the parties are found in many force majeure clauses in international commercial contracts.
Analyzing para. (1) of Art. 79 of the Vienna Convention, first of all, attention should be paid to the fact that exemption from liability for failure to fulfill an obligation is provided when it is proved that the failure was caused by an obstacle beyond the control of the party that did not fulfill the obligation. This means that the failure to fulfill an obligation must be caused by an obstacle the occurrence of which does not depend on the breaching party. Thus, this formulation lays down in the conventional concept of
exemption from liability the principle of the objective nature of the obstacle to performance, which, in fact, excludes exemption from liability in case of failure to fulfill an obligation due to the fault of the breaching party. Moreover, para. (1) of Art. 79 of the Vienna Convention establishes as a condition for exemption from liability that the breaching party could not reasonably be expected to take the impediment into account when concluding the contract, or avoiding or overcoming this obstacle or its consequences. Attention should be paid to the fact that the serviceable party cannot refer to the failure to fulfill the obligation of the other party to the extent that this failure was caused by the actions or omissions of the first party, as provided for in Art. 80 of the Vienna Convention.
Concluding the consideration of the issues of liability of the parties for non-fulfillment of contractual obligations, one can agree with the point of view expressed in the science of international law that in this part the Vienna Convention does not resolve all issues that arise and will arise in practice. Many provisions of the convention may give rise to different interpretations in their application, therefore the convention contains principles that should guide its interpretation, in particular, it is necessary to take into account its international nature and the need to promote uniformity in its application and the observance of good faith in international trade. At the same time, issues related to the subject of regulation of the convention that are not directly provided for in it, are subject to resolution in accordance with the general principles on which it is based, and in the absence of such - in accordance with the law applicable by virtue of the norms of international law. Thus, in the regulation of contracts for the international sale of goods, study of the norms of national legal systems and the practice of their application remains a relevant task.
References
1. Baies S., Rosca N. Drept civil. Drepturile reale principale: pentru uzul studentilor. Chisinau: Cartier, 2016. 143 p. (In Roman.)
2. Bessolitsyn A. A. Formirovanie sistemy professional 'nogo obrazovaniya imperatorskogo russkogo tekhnicheskogo obshchestva [Formation of the System of Professional Education of the Emperor's Russian Technical Society]. Economi-
cheskaya istoriya - Russian Journal of Economic History. 2019. Vol. 15. Issue 3 (46). Pp. 205-218. (In Russ.)
3. Cazacu D. Drept civil - partea generala (suport de curs in scheme). Chisinau. 2017. 39 p. (In Roman.)
4. Sciuchina N. V., Lisenco V. V, Zaharia S. K. Social Human Rights: Domestic and International Legal Regulation. Kishinev, 2018. 115 p. (In Eng.).
5. Tatar O. Istoricheskie i teoreticheskie as-pekty nepoimenovannykh dogovorov [Historical and Theoretical Aspects of Unnamed Agreements: monograph]. Kishinev: Tipocart Print, 2019. 214 p. (In Russ.)
Информация об авторе:
О. В. Татар, доктор юридических наук,
преподаватель кафедры частного права
Комратский государственный университет
MD-3801, Республика Молдова, г. Комрат, ул. Галацана, 8А
ORCID: 0000-0003-2158-006Х
ResearchID: co/rid 18886
Статьи в БД «Scopus» / «Web of Science»: DOI: 10.17072/1995-4190-2022-55-70-85
6. Tatar O. Unnamed Contracts as a Means of Updating the Contractual System of the Republic of Moldova: monograph. Comrat: 'A&V Poli-graf Publ., 2021. 148 p. (In Eng.).
7. Tatar O. Actual Aspects of Methods and Forms of Workers' Rights Protection in the Republic of Moldova. Yakovlevskie chteniya. So-vremennaya yuridicheskaya nauka: aktual'nye voprosy teorii, pravoprimeneniya i obrazovaniya [Yakovlev's Readings: Modern Legal Science: Topical Issues of Theory, Law Enforcement and Education. April 22-23, 2021]. Pp. 211-224. (In Russ.)
About the author:
O. V. Tatar
Comrat State University 8A, Galatzana st., Comrat, MD-3801, Republic of Moldova ORCID: 0000-0003-2158-006X ResearchID: co/rid18886
Articles in Scopus / Web of Science: DOI: 10.17072/1995-4190-2022-55-70-85
