下载文档原格式
委托书寻求国际商事仲裁的授权委托书关于寻求国际商事仲裁的授权亲爱的法律顾问：我，【委托人全名】，身份证明号码为【委托人身份证号码】，现住址为【委托人住址】，特此委托并授权您作为我的法律代表，代表我进行国际商事仲裁事务，并对此事采取一切必要行动。
鉴于前述事宜，我特此向您明确陈述以下事宜：一、背景介绍我作为【委托人全名】，在【相关行业】领域拥有丰富的经验和不可替代的商业声誉。
近期，我参与了一桩国际商事交易，与【交易对方全名】（以下简称“交易对方”）签订了一份商务合同，并支付了相应的用款。
然而，事情并未按照预期发展。
交易对方未能履行合同中规定的责任，并在商事交易中存在违约行为。
我曾多次与其协商解决此争议，但所有努力均以失败告终。
鉴于以上情况，我认为仅通过谈判无法解决此争议，并决定寻求国际商事仲裁庭的公正裁决。
因此，我特此委托您作为我的法律代表，代表我参与国际商事仲裁，并在我利益最大化的前提下为我争取最佳解决方案。
二、授权范围为代表我进行国际商事仲裁，我特此授权您执行以下行为：1. 提交仲裁申请：根据仲裁合同的约定，代表我向指定的国际商事仲裁庭提出仲裁申请，并确保申请材料的准确和完备。
2. 提交证据和辩论材料：代表我搜集、整理和提交与本案有关的证据和辩论材料，包括但不限于合同、通信记录、支付凭证等，以支持我的仲裁请求。
3. 参与仲裁庭审：作为我的代表，参与仲裁庭的听证会，并向仲裁庭陈述我的观点和诉求，确保我的利益得到充分维护。
4. 辩护及申辩：为我提供法律建议，并代表我进行必要的辩护和申辩工作，确保我的权益得到最大程度保障。
5. 达成和解协议：在充分了解我的意愿和利益的基础上，代表我与对方进行谈判，并在必要时达成和解协议。
6. 协助执行仲裁裁决：在仲裁程序结束后，协助我执行仲裁庭已作出的裁决，并确保我能够按照裁决得到自己的合法权益。
三、报酬及费用1. 报酬：作为我的法律代表，您将根据实际工作量和专业能力获得合理报酬。
委托律师代理国际商事仲裁的委托书委托书尊敬的先生/女士:我，[委托人姓名]，住址为[委托人地址]，特此委托[受托人姓名]律师，住址为[受托人地址]，代表本人在国际商事仲裁案件中进行法律代理。
一、委托事项根据本次委托，[受托人姓名]律师将负责以下事项的代理：1. 研究案件事实和证据，制定相关法律策略；2. 准备仲裁申请书，并在必要时对其进行修改；3. 准备仲裁答辩，包括回应对方提出的所有诉求；4. 准备仲裁证据，包括但不限于律师陈述、证人证言、鉴定报告等；5. 提交相关文件至仲裁庭，与对方进行交流、合作并解决相关问题；6. 出席仲裁庭听证会，并进行代理辩护；7. 分析仲裁庭的裁决，提出相关异议（如有需要）；8. 协助执行仲裁庭的裁决。
二、代理权限在代理过程中，本委托书授予[受托人姓名]律师以下权限：1. 出庭代理：包括但不限于提出口头陈述、质询对方证人等；2. 文件处理：包括但不限于起草、提交、交换、修改和签署相关的仲裁文件、证据等；3. 签署文件：代表委托人签署与案件有关的文件，例如仲裁申请书、答辩书等；4. 参与谈判：与对方或对方代理律师就解决案件进行谈判，包括达成和解协议等；5. 其他必要行动：为顺利进行案件代理，[受托人姓名]律师有权处理与案件有关的其他合理行动。
三、费用安排1. 本委托为有偿委托，[受托人姓名]律师将根据受托代理工作的性质和时间进行合理的收费。
具体费用以双方达成的书面协议为准；2. 经费支付方式：在双方协商一致的前提下，[委托人姓名]将按照合理时间节点支付相关费用。
费用支付可以通过银行转账或现金等方式进行；3. 费用支出范围：[受托人姓名]律师将会将相关费用合理用于案件代理中，包括但不限于文书起草、证据收集、证人传讯、辩护策略等。
四、保密责任在委托期间及委托事项执行完毕后，在不影响法律职业道德和相关法律法规的前提下，[受托人姓名]律师将对委托事项及相关文件进行保密，并不得向任何第三方透露相关事项。
国际商事仲裁代理委托书范本甲方：地址：联系人：电话：电子邮箱：乙方：地址：联系人：电话：电子邮箱：委托代理人：姓名：职务：律师执业证号/编号：一、委托事项甲方委托乙方为其在国际商事仲裁程序中的代理人，处理以下事项：1. 出席仲裁听证会并进行辩护；2. 提交文件，包括起诉状、答辩状、证据材料等；3. 进行法律研究和论证；4. 就仲裁程序相关问题与仲裁庭进行沟通，并提出有关请求；5. 进行和解及谈判等谈判性活动；6. 其他为履行代理职责所必要的事项。
二、授权和义务1. 乙方有权代甲方进行上述委托事项，并可自行决定合适的策略和行动，代表甲方与仲裁庭和对方当事人进行沟通和交涉。
2. 乙方须严格履行代理义务，维护甲方的合法权益，采取一切必要措施保护甲方利益。
3. 乙方有权进一步委托其他律师或专家协助履行代理职责，但应保证其委托的律师或专家具备相关专业知识和良好的声誉。
4. 乙方应向甲方及时提供完整、准确的案件进展情况和风险评估，并在必要时寻求甲方的指示和授权。
5. 乙方有权就委托事项向甲方收取合理的律师费用，并对费用的支出进行适当的说明和报告。
三、费用和支付1. 甲方将支付乙方在此次代理程序中产生的律师费用、专家费用、诉讼费用和其他相关费用。
2. 乙方应按照有关收费规定和实际工作情况向甲方提供费用清单，并提前征得甲方同意后支付相关费用。
四、解除委托1. 任何一方可以随时解除本委托关系，但应提前书面通知对方。
2. 解除委托后，应继续履行已发生的义务，并妥善处理未完成的事宜。
3. 如因解除委托方的原因给对方造成损失的，应承担相应的赔偿责任。
五、争议解决1. 本委托书的解释及争议解决适用的法律为__________________（填写适用法律）。
2. 若因本委托书引起的争议不能通过友好协商解决的，应提交__________________（填写仲裁机构或法院）仲裁或诉讼解决。
六、生效和其他1. 本委托书自双方签字或盖章之日起生效，有效期至仲裁终结。
委托书就国际商事仲裁案件委托律师代理委托书尊敬的律师先生/女士，我，（委托人姓名），系（国籍），住在（居住地），特此授权您作为我的代理律师处理以下国际商事仲裁案件：案件概述：案件名称：（案件名称）仲裁机构：（仲裁机构名称）案件编号：（案件编号）当事人信息：申请方/原告：- 公司/个人名称：- 注册地/住所地：- 联系方式：被申请方/被告：- 公司/个人名称：- 注册地/住所地：- 联系方式：案件背景：（在此简要叙述案件的起因和发展，涉及的争议点以及任何重要事实）仲裁请求：我作为申请方/原告，在此委托您代表我提出以下仲裁请求：1.（详细描述第一个仲裁请求）2.（详细描述第二个仲裁请求）3.（详细描述第三个仲裁请求）（如果有更多仲裁请求，请按照相同的格式添加）我相信您具有广泛的法律知识和丰富的仲裁实践经验，能够代表我的利益并为本案提供最佳的法律支持。
代理权：在本案件中，我授权您代表我进行以下行为：1.代表我参加任何与本案有关的仲裁程序，包括但不限于参加听证会、提交证据和辩护意见等；2.代表我进行与被申请方/被告的协商，寻求解决本案的和解或妥协方案；3.代表我签署与本案相关的文件，包括仲裁协议、证据材料、书面陈述等；4.代表我向仲裁机构提交诉讼文件、证据材料和其他必要文件；5.代表我进行与仲裁程序相关的其他一切行为。
费用和报酬：您的代理服务费用将按照我们双方提前协商的方式进行支付，并且我同意支付所有与本案有关的费用，包括但不限于仲裁费、律师费、证人费用、鉴定费用等。
保密协议：鉴于本案涉及商业机密和敏感信息，我特此委托并要求您保持所有与本案相关的信息的机密。
您必须确保不向任何第三方披露本案的任何细节或文件，除非经过我的明确授权或法律要求。
解决争议：任何因本委托书引起的争议应由双方友好协商解决。
如协商不成，双方一致同意提交（仲裁机构名称）进行仲裁，并接受其最终裁决。
委托期限：本委托书自双方签署之日起生效，并持续有效直至本案最终裁决作出。
商事仲裁代理词
尊敬的仲裁委员会：
本案为一起商事争议，由我代理申请人提起仲裁。
根据相关法律
规定和合同约定，我方认为申请人有权要求被申请人承担违约责任，
并请求仲裁委员会做出公正、合理的裁决。
此案起因于申请人与被申请人签订了一份合同，约定被申请人向
申请人提供产品服务，并支付相应的费用。
然而，被申请人未按照约
定履行合同义务，导致申请人遭受了经济损失。
为维护自身合法权益，申请人向仲裁委员会提出仲裁申请。
经过我方调查取证和分析研究，我们已经收集到了充分的证据，
证明被申请人存在明显的违约行为，并对申请人造成了实际损失。
我
们认为，根据相关法律规定和合同约定，被申请人应该承担全部违约
责任，并赔偿申请人的经济损失。
在此，我代理申请人请求仲裁委员会依据相关法律规定和合同约定，做出公正、合理的仲裁裁决，判令被申请人承担全部违约责任，
并赔偿申请人的经济损失，同时承担本案的仲裁费用。
我代理申请人将秉承诚实守信、公正客观的原则，为申请人争取
应有的合法权益，愿意与仲裁委员会共同努力，完成本案的公正、公平、公开的审理。
此致，
敬礼！
代理人：XXX
日期：XXX年XXX月XXX日。
Award sample 仲裁裁决书中英文(上)双方当事人：申诉方/反诉被诉方：卖方被诉方/反诉申诉方：买方Parties：Claimant/counter-defendant： SellerDefendant/Counter-claimant： Buyer仲裁地：Place of arbitration：事实FACTS1994年，双方当事人根据某种协议规格规定签署了3份买卖一种产品的合同。
在收到货运单据后，买方即按合同规定，支付了全部合同价的90%.In 1994, the parties concluded three contracts for the sale of a product according to certain contract specifications. The buyer paid 90% of the price payable under each of the contracts upon presentation of the shipping documents, as contractually agreed.按第一和第三份合同提供的产品符合协议规格，第二批货物的规格在装运前就有过争议。
产品抵达目的地后重新检验，发现其不符合协议规格。
为便于脱手，经过某种处理，最终买方将产品卖给了第三方，损失惨重。
The product delivered pursuant to the first and third contracts met the contract specifications. The conformity of the second consignment was dispute prior to its shipment. When the product was again inspected upon arrival, it was found that it did not meet the contract specifications. The product was eventually sold by the buyer to third parties at considerable loss, after having undergone a certain treatment to make it more saleable.卖方提请仲裁，要求收回10%的合同余款。
商事仲裁案件代理词范文doc尊敬的仲裁庭：我是[申请人/被申请人] [委托代理人姓名]，今天非常荣幸能够站在这里，为我的当事人阐述我们的观点。
一、案件基本情况回顾。
咱们这个案子啊，就像一场迷雾重重的戏。
我的当事人是[当事人身份及基本情况简介]，对方呢是[对方当事人身份简介]。
事情的起因呢，就是在[具体的商业交易或者合作事项]这个事儿上。
就好比两个人搭伙做生意，本来说好了要按照[之前约定的合同条款或者商业合作模式]来走的。
二、我方观点阐述。
# （一）关于合同的履行。
1. 我们先说说合同这事儿。
合同啊，在商业世界里就像交通规则一样，大家都得遵守。
我们这边可是严格按照合同来办事的。
比如说合同里明确规定了[列举一些我方履行合同的关键条款和我方对应的履行行为]，我们像勤劳的小蜜蜂一样，一点都没含糊。
2. 可是对方呢？他们就有点像在马路上乱开车的司机，完全不顾交通规则。
他们在[指出对方未履行合同的行为]方面，做得那叫一个糟糕。
就拿[具体事例]来说，按照合同，他们应该在[具体时间]给我们提供[某种货物或者服务]，结果呢？就像把我们晾在半路上，啥都没有。
这可把我们的整个商业计划都给打乱了，就像精心搭建的积木城堡，被一下子推倒了。
# （二）损害赔偿问题。
1. 由于对方这种不履行合同的行为，给我们造成的损失那可真是像雪球一样越滚越大。
我们的直接损失就有[列出直接损失的项目和大概金额]。
这就好比我本来口袋里有100块钱，准备去买个能赚钱的小玩意儿，结果对方把我的100块钱弄没了，还让我失去了赚钱的机会。
2. 还有间接损失呢。
因为他们的过错，我们和其他合作伙伴的关系也受到了影响。
就像一根绳子上的蚂蚱，一只出问题，其他的也跟着乱套了。
我们本来和[其他合作伙伴名称]有很好的合作前景，就因为这个事儿，人家对我们也有点犹豫了。
这部分的损失虽然不太好精确计算，但就像天上飘着的乌云，虽然看不到具体有多少雨水，但大家都知道雨下下来肯定会淹了庄稼。
仲裁申请人代理词
代理词是指代理人根据其所了解案件情况，结合法律对案件事实、证据的分析、认定和法律的理解，向仲裁委员会提出的有利于申请人实体权益的保护和程序权利行使的意见或建议。
以下是一个仲裁申请人代理词的示例：
尊敬的仲裁员：
根据《中华人民共和国XX法》和《中华人民共和国XX法》的规定，我受本案申请人XX的委托，担任其在XX仲裁委员会申请XX公司合同纠纷一案的代理人。
在深入研究本案事实、证据和相关法律法规的基础上，我发表以下代理意见：
一、本案的基本事实和证据
本案涉及申请人XX与被申请人XX公司之间的合同纠纷。
根据申请人提供的证据材料，双方于XXXX年XX月XX日签订了《XX合同》，约定了双方的权利和义务。
然而，被申请人未按照合同约定履行义务，给申请人造成了巨大的经济损失。
申请人因此向仲裁委员会申请仲裁。
二、仲裁请求和理由
根据《中华人民共和国XX法》第XX条的规定，申请人提出以下仲裁请求：
被申请人支付申请人因违约造成的经济损失XX元；
被申请人承担本案的仲裁费用。
理由如下：
被申请人未按照合同约定履行义务，违反了《中华人民共和国XX法》第XX条的规定；
被申请人的违约行为给申请人造成了巨大的经济损失，应当承担相应的赔偿责任。
三、代理结论和建议
基于以上事实、证据和法律依据，代理人建议仲裁委员会：
支持申请人的仲裁请求，裁决被申请人支付申请人因违约造成的经济损失XX元；
裁决被申请人承担本案的仲裁费用。
以上代理意见，请仲裁委员会予以充分考虑。
谢谢。
代理人：XXX XXXX年XX月XX日。
委托仲裁范本国际商事仲裁委托范本国际商事仲裁委托范本甲方：（委托人）乙方：（受托人）鉴于甲方与乙方之间存在有关（合同/争议等）的分歧和争议，甲方无法通过协商解决，双方决定通过仲裁方式解决争议。
根据《中华人民共和国仲裁法》和其他相关法律法规，双方达成以下委托仲裁的协议：一、仲裁的选择与程序1.1 甲方和乙方一致同意将争议提交国际商事仲裁委员会（以下简称“仲裁机构”）进行仲裁。
1.2 仲裁由（指定仲裁员/委任仲裁庭）进行，具体仲裁程序、组成仲裁庭的方式、仲裁费用等事项由仲裁机构根据相应规则制定。
1.3 仲裁庭将基于甲、乙双方提交的证据、理据、陈述等进行仲裁，并依据相关法律和条款进行裁决。
裁决是终局的，对双方有约束力。
二、委托的内容2.1 甲方委托乙方代表其参与仲裁程序，包括但不限于提交申请、答辩、提供证据和陈述意见等。
2.2 乙方应充分了解甲方的利益，依法保护甲方的权益，并代表甲方参与仲裁程序的一切事宜。
2.3 甲方如需提供证据和其他相关材料，乙方应及时通知甲方并协助甲方准备和提交相关材料。
2.4 乙方在代表甲方参与仲裁程序时，应严格按照甲方的意愿和指示行事，保护甲方合法权益。
三、保密和公正原则3.1 双方对仲裁程序中涉及的信息、文件、证据等保密，不得向第三方披露，除非双方另有约定或法律法规规定。
3.2 甲方和乙方应遵守公正、诚实原则，提供真实、准确的证据和陈述，并尊重仲裁机构的规则和决定。
四、费用承担4.1 仲裁费用由甲方全额承担，包括但不限于仲裁机构的管理费和仲裁员的费用。
4.2 如仲裁庭认定甲方胜诉，则乙方应受甲方的请求，协助甲方向败诉方追偿仲裁费用。
五、生效与执行5.1 本委托仲裁协议经甲、乙双方签字盖章后生效，并与仲裁申请书、答辩书等相关文件具有同等法律效力。
5.2 甲方和乙方同意接受仲裁裁决，并在仲裁裁决作出后及时履行相关义务。
如一方未按裁决履行义务，对方有权向有管辖权的法院申请强制执行。
法律英语期末考试题目Arbitration Statement of Attorneys学院法学院专业法律硕士学生姓名陈磊学号 S****** 年级研一指导老师黄力华教务处制表二Ο一二年九月十三日Arbitration Statement of AttorneysDear arbitrators,Charlie Law firm accepted the commission of the applicant-Equapack, and assigned me as their arbitration agent. According to the Arbitration Rules and the requirements of the arbitral tribunal, I attended today's court proceedings. Now on the basis of the case I make the following agent advices:1.the applicant was misled by the respondent when they weresubjected to purchase the machines.The applicant mentioned in the offer that the machines they need could be expected to be used over a wide range of products, both fine goods and coarser goods, and presented that both price and prompt delivery would be essential elements of their purchasing decision. (Claimant’s Exhibit No.1) However, what the respondent has recommended to the applicant are Model 14 auger-feeder packaging machines, which have been discontinued in favor of Model 16. The respondent based only on the demands made by the applicant and recommended the applicant for the 14 machines which had been discontinued. According to the common sense, we know that the products are discontinued because of poor sales, defects or the emergence of new alternative products. In July 2002, theapplicant gave the respondent an offer to buy some machines, the applicants are strongly recommended to buy Model 14 auger-feeder packaging machines which were first introduced in 2000 and had been discontinued. Responde nt’s intention is obvious that is to sell the old products and make a profit. The applicant as a food packaging company lacks in understanding of the upgrading of the machines, and purchased Model 14 auger-feeder packaging machines by the misleading.2. The respondent did not fulfill the obligations to make a reasonable and adequate description of the machines.In the contract of sale, the buyer has a right to know. Buyers shall have the right to demand business operators, in light of the different conditions of commodities or services, to provide their prices, origin, manufacturers, usage, functions, standards, grades, main ingredients, date of production, term of validity, certificates of inspection, operation instructions, after-sale services or information relating to contents, standards and costs of the services. In the contract between the applicant and the respondent, the respondent did not make a reasonable and adequate description of the machines.3. The respondent did not make an explanation of t he machine’s use and performance.On July 3, 2002, in the respondent’s new offer to the applicant, it mentioned that “We are a premier manufacturer of equipment for the food packaging industry.” It meant that the respondent was very familiar with the food packaging industry, that it must know different foods need different packaging machines very well. When the applicant told the respondent that what the applicant packaged products for A2Z contains salt, the respondent did not take any measures, nor did tell them the Model 14 auger-feeder packaging machines can’t package salt. From the beginning to the end, the respondent did not describe that. “In your letter of 3 July 2002 responding to my inquiry you stated that we should need an auger-feeder because it could pack both coarse and fine goods. You did not say that there were any products for which the machines you proposed should not be used. When I telephoned you on 23 July 2002 in order to inquire about the shipping date, I specifically told you that one of the products that would be packed using the machines was salt. You did not tell me that machines could not be used for packaging salt. Moreover, when you replied to the inquiry by telefax the following day, you did not even mention salt.”(Claimant’s Exh ibit No.6) To say the least, assuming that the respondent had informed the applicant Model 14 auger-feeder packaging machines should not be used for salt. They should also wait for the applicant to respond to them, rather than rely on the price to recommen d them to purchase Model 14 machines. If the machine can’t beused, how about cheap price and packaging speed these are dependent on that the machines can be used reasonably and normally.4. The respondent didn’t give the applicant a reasonable description of the industry standards of packaged food.Although the respondent pointed out that Model 16, which is designed to pack salt, uses high-grade stainless steel. That’s the industry standard. However, the industry standard was only known by the respondent. The applicant as a food-packaging company must not understand the industry standard of packaging machines. For this, the respondent did not make a reasonable explanation to the applicant.5. The respondent did not provide the applicant with the instructions of the use of the machine.As we all know, in the contract of sale, the seller has the obligation to make reasonable and adequate description for buyers. For example, in the contract of the water heater sale, the seller should specify installation instructions; precautions. In this case, the respondent did not provide the instructions of the machines to the applicant. “All of our literature and our website make it clear that machines built to pack salt, as is our Model 17, use a high-grade stainless stee l.”(Claimant’s Exhibit No.7) There were no relevant instructions come up with the machines which the respondent sold to the applicant. Thirdly, The respondent provided theproduct does not meet the standards and there were defects in the products. In the u se of machinery, the applicant found that “Although the machines worked reasonably well at the beginning, they were slower for most products than had been Equapack’s previous experience with similar machines.” “Furthermore, since the machines were packagin g foodstuffs, there was concern that the food itself might become contaminated and it was decided that they should no longer be used.” From the expert testimony, we can know that “The lower rate for the finer product is due to the fact that the metal parts of the product paths within the machine are not highly polished; higher productivity, approaching 180 bags per minute could be achieved for the finer products with polished products components in the products paths. I am aware that similar machines are available with highly polished and chromium plated product paths.” “The Model 14 machines that I saw could be used in production line packaging, though the production rates for products other than coffee beans were noticeably below the average industry rate of 180 bags per minute for both coarse and fine products.” Although the Model 14 machines can still be used for product packaging, but its speed is below the industry average. The applicant had proposed the request of the speed to the respondent and this illustrates the importance of time. The machines which were provided by the applicant could not meet thegeneral packaging requirements, and nor reach the general speed of the packaging.6. The respondent's actions constitute a fundamental breach of the contract, and the applicant is entitled to terminate the contract. The non-conformity of the six Model 14 auger-feeder packaging machines was so serious as to constitute fundamental breach as defined in CISG, article 25.That “A breach of contract committed by one of the parties is fundamental if it results in such detriment to the other party as substantially to deprive him of what he is entitled to expect under the contract, unless the party in breach did not foresee and a reasonable person of the same kind in the same circumstances would not have foreseen such a result.” Consequently, Equapack had the right to avoid the contract pursuant to CISG, article 49(1)(a) and did so by the letter of Mr. Swan, dated 19 October 2002. CISG, article 49(1)(a) provides that, “ （1）The buyer may declare the contract avoided: (a) if the failure by the seller to perform any of his obligations under the contract or this Convention amounts to a fundamental breach of contract.” After the dispute, the applicant had been several attempts by telephone to settle the dispute, but Med-Machines had adamantly refused to discuss any settlement. Throughout the process, the applicant's attitude has been positive, and the applicant was always trying to avoid responsibility. In summary, all of the applicant's request have the facts and legal basis andshould be supported.Above comments, for the tribunal to have full consideration and support the applicant's request. Thanks the arbitrators!Sincerely!Agents: Charlie Law firm , Lawyer: Chen LeiOctober 14th, 2012。
法律英语期末论文专业：2014级法律硕士（非法学）课程名称：法律英语指导老师：***学生：陈怡良学号：*************Arbitration representation for Equapack, Inc for contract disputes in Equapack, Inc v.Medi-Machines, S.ADistinguished presiding judge, the judicial officers,In accordance with the law ,I accept consignation of equapack company ,namely the accuser, as the agent of this case. Now I state the following agent opinions .I.About time questions of the established contractIn this case, my litigant showed interest to the defendant to buy 6 sets of packing machines with reasonable price and on time deliver in the contract so as to pack various products. The defendant MEDI company responded to provide 2 kinds of packing machines with type 16 and type 14 ,and suggested my litigant to purchase the type 14 on 3rd,July,2002.My litigant promised to the defendant on 12th,July,2002 that he was willing to purchase 6 sets of packing machines with type 14.At that time, the contract was established. On 23th,July,2002,my litigant mentioned to the defendant during the phone conversation that the products which would be packed by the subject matter in the contract conta ined salt, but the opposite party didn’t make any responses at that time. What’s more, the defendant didn’t mention the specificity of salt in two sides’ faxes. When the packing machines of type 14 were brought to production, they were corroded by the salt and could not work, so the production had to be stopped. For this, my litigant suffered huge lose .II. About questions of sellers ‘ obligations in Contracts for the International Sale of Goods.1.the defendant provided commodities which did not conform to the contract.Our legal basis is the b article of the second regulation in the 35th provision of the United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods. This article is composed with 4 parts. The a article and d article of the second regulation in the 35th provision can be applied to all contracts unless both parties have another agreements. the b article and c article of the second regulation in the 35th provision can be applied only in the particular situation. Standards regulatedby these parts are being accumulated, namely, unless commodities conform to all applied standards, then they don’t conform to the contract’s requests.The b article of the second regulation in the 35th provision requires that commodities should be suitable in any particular purposes that the buyer told or implied to the seller when they established contract.In this case, firstly, my litigant stated to the defendant that the machine would pack various products which contain detailed products and rough products. Although salt is not be expressed as one of the products to be packed, in reality, it is known that salt is contained in the detailed products according to common social experience. It is classified as the implied range. Secondly, during the phone conversation between the engineer swan of my litigant equapack company and the seller Drake of the opposite party, it was mentioned that A2Z company want my litigant to pack various products in which salt is contained. During the phone conversation on 23th,July,2002,my litigant clearly expressed to the opposite party that the packed products contained salt. This showed that my litigant also told the defendant this particular purpose.My litigant implied the particular purpose when the contract was established, and expressed clearly this purpose to the defendant in the reasonable period after the contract was established. So this provision is suitable to my litigant’s situation.What’s more, the provision also requires that if the buyer doesn’t need to reply on the seller’s skills and judgment, or this dependence is unreasonable, then the seller’s commodities conform to the contract’s requests. But in this case, the seller’s commodities didn’t conform to the contract’s requests. Reasons are listed as following:Firstly, based on the command of products’ properties, the defendant, as the professional manufacturer of packing machine, should know that salt has extremely strong corrosion, and it will corrode the type 14 packing machine. Secondly, my litigant had never packed salt, and doesn’t know or have reasons to know that the salt is different from any other products. Therefore ,my litigant needs to rely on the defendant’s skills and judgment, and this dependence is reasonable.In sum, based on the b article of the second regulation in the 35th provision in CISG, the defendant’s commodities don’t conform to the contract’s requests, so the defendant breaches the contract.2.T he defendant breaches the article of commodity’s special pur pose which belongs to the quality guarantee obligations.In Contracts for the International Sale of Goods, sellers’ obligations include delivery, quality guarantee obligations, rights guarantee obligations and so on .About the seller’s quality guarante e obligations, the 36th provision in GISG requires that(1)the seller should obey requirements of this contract and agreement, should be responsible to any situations that don’t conform to the contract and caused by the risk transfer from the seller to the buyer. Although these situations are gradually obvious after the time, the seller is also responsible .(2)the seller is also responsible to any situations that don’t conform to the contract after the time stated in last provision. If these situations are caused by the breach of other obligations, including the breach of guarantees that goods can be applied to the common use or some particular purposes in a period, or goods can maintain some particular quality or characteristic, the seller is also accountable.This provision states clearly the relation between the seller’s responsibility caused by the disagreement of the contract and risk transfer :namely in some situations, the seller should take responsibility when any disagreement of the contract occurred after the risk transferred to the buyer. If the disagreement is caused by the breach of any obligations, including guarantees that goods can be applied to the common use or some particular purposes in a period, the seller is still accountable.In this case, the type 14 packing machines of my litigant need to pack products which include salt, but these machines don’t have salt anticorrosion function which made our machines corroded and can’t work after the application for some time.According t o FOB, the risk has been transferred to my litigant ,but this doesn’t mean that the defendant is not responsible for the packing machine problems after the risk transfer. The defendant still needs to take responsibility of the disagreement of the contract though the risk has been transferred. Here the disagreement of the contract means that the seller, namely the defendant, breaches the quality guarantee obligation. In this case, the defendant’s quality guarantee obligations mainly relate to the special purposes of packing machines. As to the type 14 packing machines in this case, they don’t possess the special purpose of salt anticorrosion .The defendanthas obligations to state this situation, and tell my litigant that these machines can be corroded by salt. The defendant of this case should take responsibility for his non-fulfillment of this obligation.III. About questions of fundamental breach of contractAccording to the 25th provision in CISG, because of one party’s breach of contract, the other party suffers loss, and is deprived of what is belonged to him according to the contract, this is called fundamental breach of contract. Unless the party who breach the contract doesn’t predict this situation, then it is called fundamental breach of contract. But a amenable person on an equal footing has no reason to predict this result.We concluded that the fundamental breach of contract should conform to the following points:1.one party breaches the contract.2.the breach brings loss to the other party.3.the breach made the other party deprived of what is belonged to him according to the contract4.the breach results can be predicted by the defaulting party.In this case, first: according to the second point of my agent, namely the 35th and 36th in the convention, the seller, namely the defendant, breached the contract. Second: the breach of the defendant brought huge loss to my litigant .Firstly the subject matter in the contract was damaged, type 14 machines were corroded by salt, and they could n’t finish the production task normally which directly caused the non-fulfillment execution of packing contract between my litigant and A2Z company. We couldn’t deliver goods on regular time in regular quantity. All these made my litigant breach another contract. Next my litigant suffered the loss of commercial benefits and commercial opportunities. Thirdly, in fact, these damages have deprived the benefits that belong to my litigant according to the contract. The basic purpose of my litigant to make this contract is to fulfill the contract signed with A2Z company. The disagreement of packing machines directly deprives the benefits of my litigant in the contract. Fourthly, to the defendant, the breach results are totally predictable. The defendant know that products which need to be packed include salt, he can totally predicts the salt corrosion to packing machines. all these make my litigant suffer huge loss. The defendant can completely predict results.According to the above 4 points, the defendant can be defined as the fundamental breach of contractTherefore, my litigant requests to declare that the contract is invalid, and demand the court to ask the defendant to refund payment and all fees that my litigant cost in this transaction, and ask the defendant to pay all losses my litigant suffered in this transaction.The above agent opinions are for collegial panel’s reference.With best wishes!Attorney：Yiliang ChenDecember 1th，2015。
