英文翻譯(CISG)

Question

The applicable-law clause in the contract ( Minnesota law )and the arbitration clause contained in the initial contract between Themo King and Sorhofroid, both of which clauses had been invoked by Thermo King, were found by the Court to be inapplicable to the sub-purchaser, which was not party to the initial contract. The court ruled, moreover, that only the franchise contract and not sales made in application of the contract should be subject to the Minnesota law chosen by the parties. In addition, the Court stressed that CISG was applicable, unless otherwise agreed, to sales concluded after 1 January 1988 between a seller and a buyer with their places of business in the United States and France, respectively. The Court found that the sub-purchaser could base his action against the American seller on CISG, since the seller had issued a contractual guarantee in favour of the end-user.
The Court found articles 35(2) and 36 CISG to be applicable with regard to the defects of the refrigeration unit, noting that the unit had broken down within a short period of time after it was first operated and that it was up to the seller, presumed liable, to prove that it was not responsible for the defect. Notwithstanding any more precise determination of the defect, the early breakdown established the Court’s finding of lack of conformity and it is assigning of full liability to Thermo King.
看不懂所以麻煩一下下~~

Answer 1

The applicable-law clause in the contract ( Minnesota law )and the arbitration clause contained in the initial contract between Themo King and Sorhofroid, both of which clauses had been invoked by Thermo King, were found by the Court to be inapplicable to the sub-purchaser, which was not party to the initial contract.
對於Thermo King所主張的兩個條款--亦即Thermo King與Sorhofroid間最初締結的契約中的「準據法條款」（適用明尼蘇達州法律）及「仲裁條款」，法院認定對於未列該契約當事人的次買受人並不適用。
The court ruled, moreover, that only the franchise contract and not sales made in application of the contract should be subject to the Minnesota law chosen by the parties.
法院更進一步指出，只有經銷契約須適用當事人合意選定的明尼蘇達州法律，至於依經銷契約所為之買賣行為則不受拘束。
In addition, the Court stressed that CISG was applicable, unless otherwise agreed, to sales concluded after 1 January 1988 between a seller and a buyer with their places of business in the United States and France, respectively.
此外，法院也強調，對於營業處所分別位於美國與法國的出賣人與買受人間，在1988年後所完成的買賣交易，除非當事人間另有約定，應適用CISG(United Nations Convention on Contracts for Internationa Sale of Goods, 聯合國國際貨物買賣契約公約)。
The Court found that the sub-purchaser could base his action against the American seller on CISG, since the seller had issued a contractual guarantee in favour of the end-user.
法院判定，既然美國出賣人已經對末端使用者給予品質保證的承諾，次買受人得依據CISG向出賣人索償。
The Court found articles 35(2) and 36 CISG to be applicable with regard to the defects of the refrigeration unit, noting that the unit had broken down within a short period of time after it was first operated and that it was up to the seller, presumed liable, to prove that it was not responsible for the defect.
法院認為，關於冷凍組件的瑕疵得援用CISG第35條第2款及第36條之規定，由於冷凍組件在第一次操作後於短時間內即故障，因此推定出賣人有責任， 出賣人必須舉證證明其對於瑕疵的存在無須負責。
Notwithstanding any more precise determination of the defect, the early breakdown established the Court’s finding of lack of conformity and it is assigning of full liability to Thermo King.
儘管瑕疵為何仍有待進一步判定，但故障的早期發生已使法院認定產品欠缺應有的品質，並認定Thermo King應負全部的責任。

Answer 2

在合約(明尼蘇達法律)裡的適用法律的條款和包含在在Themo國王和Sorhofroid之間的最初合約裡的仲裁條款， Thermo國王產生的條款是其中兩者都， 被法庭找到對附屬買主不適用，這最初合約的非締約方。 而且，管理的那些法庭，那只有那些特許權簽合約而不銷售在敷用的那些合約簽訂應該以選擇的這明尼蘇達法律為準， 聚會。 另外， 法庭強調CISG是適用的， 除非另有協議， 對銷售有在美國和法蘭西的他們的營業地點在在一個賣方和一個買方之間的1988年1月1日之后結束，分別。 法庭發現附屬買主能基於對在CISG上的美國賣方的他的行動， 自從賣方已經有利於最終用戶發布一個合約的保證。
法庭發現第35條(2)和36 CISG關於冷藏單位的缺陷是適用的， 注意到單位已經在短的時期內失敗， 它被首先操作和它由賣方決定，認為有責任，證明這不對缺陷負責。 雖然缺陷的更準確的決心， 早故障建立法庭不符合的發現並且分發全部責任給Thermo金。

Answer 3

可適用法律條目在合同(明尼蘇達法律)和在最初的合同包含的仲裁條款在Themo國王和Sorhofroid之間，其中之二條目由熱國王祈求了，是由法院發現的是不適用的對次級採購員，不是黨對最初的合同。 被統治的，而且，法院在合同的應用銷售做的而不是仅特權合同應該是受黨選擇的明尼蘇達法律支配。 另外，法院分別注重CISG是可適用的，除非經同意，到在1988年1月1日以後結束的銷售在賣主和一個買家與他們的營業場所在美國和法國之間。 法院發現次級採購員可能根據他的行動反對美國賣主CISG，因為賣主發布了一個契約保證傾向於終端用戶。
法院發現文章35 (2)和36 CISG是可適用的關於冷凍機的瑕疵，注意到，單位在短的時期內劃分了，在它首先被管理之後，并且它是由賣主決定，假定有義務，證明，它沒有負責對瑕疵。 仍然瑕疵的精確決心，早期故障建立了法院的發現缺乏整合，并且它是分配充分的責任到熱國王。