AVOIDANCE OF INTERNATIONAL SALE OF GOODS CONTRACTS FOR FUNDAMENTAL BREACH UNDER THE VIENNA CONVENTION (CISG) AND SAUDI DOMESTIC LAW

Abstract

This study comparatively analyzes the degree of compatibility between the United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods (CISG) and domestic Saudi law regarding avoidance of international sales contracts for fundamental breach. Part one provides a general overview of the founding, aims, and principles of the CISG and then outlines the provisions of Saudi law derived from Shari'ah law and its sources and describes the Saudi legal system and its legal institutions. Part one also summarizes the similarities and differences between the two legal systems’ conceptions of sales contracts and contract avoidance for fundamental breach. Saudi Arabia’s constitution prohibits the adoption of provisions or rules that contravene the principles of Islamic law. Saudi authorities’ recognition of this convention will therefore depend on whether it conflicts with the principles of Islamic law; thus, by demonstrating the absence of conflicts between the CISG and Islamic contract law, this study will remove one of the main barriers to the Kingdom’s ratification of the CISG. Part two of the dissertation conducts an in-depth theoretical and practical investigation of the concept of fundamental breach, considering both the notion of original fundamental breach and that of acquired fundamental breach, analyzing related provisions in the CISG, comparing these concepts and provisions to related areas of Saudi law, and assessing the possibility that Saudi law and the Saudi courts could accept the CISG’s approach. The dissertation focuses specifically on the meaning of fundamental breach in terms of theory and practice and whether aggrieved parties have the legal right to avoid contracts in cases where such breaches occur.