- Arts & Culture 6209
- Business & Economics 674
- Computers 316
- Dictionaries & Encyclopedias 74
- Education & Science 76835
- Abstracts 73
- Astrology 4
- Biology 8
- Chemistry 4010
- Coursework 15549
- Culture 8
- Diplomas 316
- Drawings 1595
- Ecology 5
- Economy 76
- English 80
- Ethics, Aesthetics 3
- For Education Students 17567
- Foreign Languages 11
- Geography 3
- Geology 1
- History 88
- Maps & Atlases 5
- Mathematics 12624
- Musical Literature 2
- Pedagogics 19
- Philosophy 22
- Physics 15120
- Political Science 5
- Practical Work 59
- Psychology 63
- Religion 4
- Russian and culture of speech 8
- School Textbooks 7
- Sociology 9
- Summaries, Cribs 87
- Test Answers 160
- Tests 8747
- Textbooks for Colleges and Universities 32
- Theses 7
- To Help Graduate Students 14
- To Help the Entrant 38
- Vetting 385
- Works 13
- Информатика 8
- Engineering 892
- Fiction 706
- House, Family & Entertainment 84
- Law 128
- Website Promotion 68
Closed Joint Stock Company appealed to the arbitration
Content: S18-364.docx 12,85 kB
Product description
A closed joint stock company appealed to an arbitration court with a claim against an individual entrepreneur for the recovery of debt under a contract for the sale of goods concluded between them.
The plaintiff believed that the transaction was a sale and purchase agreement, in which the due date was determined. After the expiration of this period, the goods transferred to the respondent were subject to payment at the price agreed upon by the parties, even if the goods were not yet realized. The contractual condition that the goods are payable as they are sold, but no later than a certain period, according to the claimant, served as a justification for the delay in payment that was provided to the buyer.
The defendant objected to the stated requirements, believing that the concluded deal meets the characteristics of the commission agreement, and not the purchase agreement, and therefore, according to clause 1 of Article 990 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, the respondent’s obligation to pay for the goods accepted for sale does not arise until its actual implementation. Since the defendant provided evidence that the goods were only partially sold and could be returned to the claimant for the remainder, he considered the claimant’s claims not to be satisfied.
Solve the merits of the case.
Additional information
After payment you will be available a link to the solution of this problem in the file of MS Word. It should be noted that the problem solutions put up for sale were successfully handed over in the period 2003-2018 and could be outdated. However, the general algorithm will always remain true.
Feedback
0| Period | |||
| 1 month | 3 months | 12 months | |
| 0 | 0 | 0 | |
| 0 | 0 | 0 | |