Art. 9(2) CISG C9-4 : According to Art. 9(2) CISG, the parties are considered to have impliedly made an inter- national usage applicable, of which the parties knew or ought to have known and which is widely known to, and regularly observed by, parties to contracts of the type involved in the particular trade concerned. Its wording makes it clear that the CISG considers inter-

doi:10.4324/9780203945445-58

Chapter

ABSTRACT

The [seller] alleges that in 1989 the defendant ordered 187,000 meters of material. The order was conﬁrmed by a letter of 24 February 1989. Later the quantities were speciﬁed as 176,000 meters. Then invoices were made and credit notes were issued for a faulty partial delivery. The last invoice of 15 January 1990 for 433,755 Ffr [French francs] (Annex 6e to Statement of Claim) was not paid. Payment of this is claimed. The defendant [. . .] alleges that the contract on which the [seller] bases his claim was not between the [seller] and herself, but was concluded between the [seller] and a third company, ﬁrm [. . .], resident in France. In the development of the contract, the defendant claims that she merely had the function of an agent. 3. 3.1. In the case at hand, there is no written contract. Under Article 11 CISG, a contract of sale can be concluded informally, it need neither be concluded in writing nor evidenced in writing.