ABSTRACT
Whether England adopts a universal test for avoidance similar to that under Art 25 of the CISG is as yet unclear. On the one hand, recent cases, law reforms and international trends look to the detriment to the injured party’s interests rather than the class of term violated. On the other hand, English law makers are still constrained by the SGA, centuries of precedent and a legal culture which favours certainty over flexibility. However, the current system for avoidance is so complex that it only undermines the certainty which classification of terms was intended to achieve. Accordingly, English law makers would be well advised to acknowledge that avoidance is determined by detriment and not by the classification of terms.
