Comment of an arbitral decision Final decision delivered: n°10422 in 2001 UNIDROIT principles Adeline Carof Stanislas d

1. Comment of an arbitral decision Final decision delivered: n°10422 in 2001 UNIDROIT principles Adeline Carof Stanislas de Taffin Arnaud Bertrand Group: MK A

2. Plan • Case presentation • 1st analysis: The way to interprete the contract • UNIDROIT Principles • 2dn analysis: final decision

3. Case presentation Defendant Claiment X AB

4. Case presentation • A contract of exclusive distribution is signed by the defendant and the claiment. • After signing the contract, the defendant told the claiment she has engaged a company in order to manage the regulation and the control of the products. • Then there were negociations concerning modifications of the conditions. • The defendant asked the claiment to communicate them, the turnover of the last years concerning the sales of contractual products. But results given < their expects. • So, the defendant cancelled the contract. • To conclude, the claiment decided to involve an arbitral procedure.

5. 1st analysis: The way to interpretethe contract. • The arbitration • The applicable law: UNIDROIT

6. UNIDROIT principles • An independent intergovernmental organisation. • Purpose methods for modernising private law and commercial law between states. • Acceptance depend on the persuasive authority of the governments.

7. UNIDROIT principles

8. 2dn analysis: final decision • To cancel the contract is a fault : the defendent must compensate the claiment. • But the damages are difficult to evaluate…

9. 2dn analysis: final decision • The arbitror has to determine the amount of the prejudice. Article 7.4.2 of the UNIDROIT principles: FULL COMPENSATION • The claiment didn’t give exactly results on the turnover. Article 7.4.3 of the UNIDROIT principles: CERTAINTY OF HARM

10. 2dn analysis: final decision • Article 7.4.2 of the UNIDROIT principles: FULL COMPENSATION “The aggrieved party is entitled to full compensation for harm sustained as a result of the non-performance. Such harm includes both any loss which it suffered and any gain of which it was deprived, taking into account any gain to the aggrieved party resulting from its avoidance of cost or harm. Such harm may be non-pecuniary and includes, for instance, physical suffering or emotional distress.” (“Le créancier a le droit à la réparation intégrale du préjudice qu’il a subi du fait de l’inexécution. Le préjudice comprend la perte qu’il a subie et le bénéfice dont il a été privé, compte tenu de tout gain résultant le créancier d’une dépense ou d’une perte évitée. ») • Article 7.4.3 of the UNIDROIT principles: CERTAINTY OF HARM “Compensation is due only for harm, including future harm, that is established with a reasonable degree of certainty. Compensation may be due for the loss of a chance in proportion to the probability of its occurrence. Where the amount of damages can not be established with a sufficient degree of certainty, the assessment is at the discretion of the court.” (“Le préjudice dont le montant ne peut être établi avec un degré suffisant de certitude est évalué à la discrétion du tribunal.”)