A Comparative Study of the Calculation Method of the Monetary Damages in International Arbitration

Rafiei, Mohammad Taghi; Rezaeenia, Masoud; Darboui, Hossein

doi:10.22059/ier.2025.360045.1007734

A Comparative Study of the Calculation Method of the Monetary Damages in International Arbitration

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

Mohammad Taghi Rafiei ¹

Masoud Rezaeenia ²

Hossein Darboui ¹

¹ Faculty of Law, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran.

² Faculty of Law, University of Shahid Beheshti, Tehran, Iran.

10.22059/ier.2025.360045.1007734

Abstract

Different factors contribute to the assessment of monetary damage, whose ignoring results in an inaccurate evaluation of monetary damage. One such factor is the approach used to calculate monetary damages. Concrete and abstract methods of calculation, namely, have been adopted for this purpose. Applying one of the aforementioned methods may result in no monetary compensation for the aggrieved party, whereas the other method may result in substantial monetary damages. Articles 75 and 76 of the United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods 1980 Vienna (CISG) have embraced both of these methods. Nonetheless, the Convention does not specify the priority or prerequisites for applying these methods, which has led the tribunal to employ them arbitrarily. A circumstance that not only renders the rights of the aggrieved party unpredictable, but also causes inconsistency in the application of the Convention. This article is descriptive and analytical, which analyzes these methods and their application conditions, and concludes that the concrete method for calculating monetary damages has precedence over the abstract method. When the abstract method’s prerequisites are not met, it is utilized.

Keywords

Calculation of Monetary Damages

CISG

Mitigation of Monetary Damages

PECL

UPICC

Subjects

Econometrics

Bates, P. J. (1991). Mitigation of Damages: A Matter of Commercial Common Sense. The Advocates' Quarterly, 13, 273. Retrieved from https://heinonline.org/hol-cgi-bin/get_pdf.cgi?handle=hein.journals/aqrty13&section=24

Borisova, B. (2007). Measurement of Damages when Contract Avoided: Comparison Between the Provisions of CISG Article 76 and the Counterpart Provisions of the PECL Article 9: 507. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Bridge, M. J. H. K. L. (2007). A Law for the International Sale of Goods. Hong Kong Law Journal, 37, 17. Retrieved from https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1431467

Chengwei, L. (2003). Remedies for Non-performance-Perspectives from CISG, UNIDROIT Principles, and PECL. SiSU on behalf of CISG Database, Pace Institute of International Commercial Law. Retrieved from https://www.academia.edu/download/57891095/CHENGWEI__Liu._-_Remedies_for_Non-performance.pdf

Enderlein, F., & Maskow, D. (1992). International Sales Law. New York: Oceana Publications.

Honnold, J. (2009). Uniform Law for International Sales under the 1980 United Nations Convention. Alphen aan den Rijn: Kluwer Law International BV.

Civil Procedure Law of Iran. (2000). Civil Procedure Law of Iran.

Civil Procedure Law of Iran. (1928). Civil Procedure Law of Iran.

Katouziyan, N. (2008). The General Principles of Contracts, 4 (5^th Ed.). Tehran: Sahami Enteshar Publishing. [In Persian]

Lando, O., & Beale, H. (2000). Principles of European Contract Law: Parts I and II. Columbia Journal of European Law, 6(3), 395-397. Retrieved from http://www.internationalcontracts.net/international-law-documents/Principles-of-European-Contract-Law.pdf

Le Pautremat, S. (2006). Mitigation of Damage: A French Perspective. International & Comparative Law Quarterly, 55(1), 205-218. Retrieved from https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/international-and-comparative-law-quarterly/article/mitigation-of-damage-a-french-perspective/00E0A9DDBAA11FDE8A0FD41F10B2CAF5

Principles of European Contract Law (PECL). (2002). Retrieved from https://www.trans-lex.org/400200/_/pecl/

Saidov, D. (2021). The Law of Damages in International Sales: The CISG And Other International Instruments. London: Bloomsbury Publishing.

Saidov, D., & Cunnington, R. (2008). Contract Damages: Domestic and International Perspectives (Eds.). London: Bloomsbury Publishing.

Saidov, D. (2002). Methods of limiting damages under the Vienna Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods. Pace International Law Review, 14, 307. Retrieved from https://digitalcommons.pace.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1199&context=pilr

Schlechtriem, P. (2016). Commentary on the UN Convention on the International Sale of Goods (CISG). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Shahidi, M. (2012). Consequences of Contracts and Obligations. Tehran: Majd Publishing. [In Persian]

Sutton, J. S. (1989). Measuring Damages under the United Nations Convention on the International Sale of Goods. OSTLJ Ohio State Technology Law Journal, 50, 737. Retrieved from https://kb.osu.edu/bitstreams/82b737d7-56ee-54dc-bf24-bf80cad881c7/download

Unidroit’s Principles of International Commercial Contracts (UPICC). (2016). Retrieved from https://www.unidroit.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/Unidroit-Principles-2016-English-bl.pdf

United Nations Convention on International Sale of Goods 1980 Vienna (CISG). (2010). Retrieved from https://uncitral.un.org/sites/uncitral.un.org/files/media-documents/uncitral/en/19-09951_e_ebook.pdf

Yovel, J. (2005). The Seller's Right to Cure a Failure to Perform: An Analytic Comparison of the Respective Provisions of the CISG and the PECL. NJCL, 1, Retrieved from https://somaesthetics.aau.dk/index.php/NJCL/article/download/3058/2582