Leslie Joie E.

Babatuan MCQ for IBT Covering Articles 76 80 of the CISG

1. For an aggrieved party to claim damages under Article 76 of the CISG, the following requisites should be present, except:

a. The contract has been avoided b. There is a current price for the goods c. The aggrieved party has not entered into a substitute transaction d. The contract has not been avoided Answer: D. The contract has not been avoided 2. Which of the following statements is true?

a. An aggrieved party who is claiming damages under Article 75 or 76 may no longer claim damages under Article 74, which is the general damage formula. b. A breaching party may ask for reduction of damages if an aggrieved party fails to take measures to mitigate the loss. c. The contract price is the price generally charged for goods of the same kind under comparable circumstances. d. The CISG provides that one cannot claim interest for damages. Answer: B. A breaching party may ask for reduction of damages if an aggrieved party fails to take measures to mitigate the loss. 3. Under Article 79, if the partys failure to perform his obligation is due to the failure by the third person whom he has engaged to perform the whole or a part of the contract, that party is exempt from liability. The statement is:

a. Absolutely true. b. Absolutely false.

c. Partly true, because there are requisites that must be met. d. Partly false, because the obligation to perform cannot be assigned to third persons. Answer: C. Partly true, because there are requisites that must be met. 4. Which of the following was upheld to be a valid act of an aggrieved party in mitigating the loss suffered, barring the breaching party from claiming reduction for damages?

a. An aggrieved buyer proposing to a sub-buyer that the goods the seller delivered late should be accepted with a10 percent reduction in price. b. An aggrieved seller selling the goods at a price below the price offered by the breaching buyer when the latter sought unsuccessfully to amend the contract. c. An aggrieved buyer failing to inspect or examine the goods properly and to deliver the documents for the notice of nonconformity. d. An aggrieved seller who did nothing to store and maintain the undelivered goods. ANSWER: A. An aggrieved buyer proposing to a sub-buyer that the goods the seller delivered late should be accepted with a10 per cent reduction in price. 5. A long term contract was entered into between a seller and a buyer. The seller later on announced that it will no longer make future deliveries to the buyer. The buyer withheld payments for deliveries already made because of such announcement. In a subsequent lawsuit, the seller made the defense that its non-performance of one of its obligations was due to the fact that the buyer withheld its payments. Is the sellers defense acceptable?

a. Yes, because the seller is entitled to the payments for the deliveries already made. The buyer has no right to withhold the payments. b. No, because the seller should have notified the buyer first that it wishes to terminate the contract and not just make an informal announcement. c. Yes, because it is the sellers right to refuse to continue with a contract and the buyers acts of non-payment is a clear breach.

d. No, because the buyers non-payment was caused by the sellers repudiation of its future delivery obligations. ANSWER: D. No, because the buyers non-payment was caused by the sellers repudiation of its future delivery obligations.