In MCC-Marble Ceramic Center, Inc v Ceramica Nuova d’Agostino, SpA (1998), the Eleventh Circuit held that the American parol evidence rule does not apply in cases governed by the UN Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods (CISG). Article 8(3) of the Convention instructs courts, in determining the intent of the parties to a contract, to give ‘due consideration … to all relevant circumstances of the case including the negotiations’. This provision, the court reasoned, was inconsistent with domestic rules, like the parol evidence rule, that limit consideration of evidence from the parties’ negotiations … (more)
[William S Dodge, Transnational Litigation Blog, 16 October 2024]
Leave a Reply