The essay is about the interpretion anomalies in connection with damages law practice of The United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods (CISG). This seems to be an essential problem regarding to that the Convention’s breach of contract-system is highly relevant, whereas it must provide a mechanism, which serves international trade between countries with huge legal, economic and social disparaties. At the heart of the system we find damages, which provides an efficient and rapid solution to cure the dysfunctions which can occur with respect to cross-border commercial relationships.

The provisions of the Convention are of a universal nature, thus they require uniform interpretation and application by the courts of the Contracting States, therefore Article 7, which deals with interpretation of rules and the filling of legal gaps, is indispensable for the successful application of the Convention and the achievement of its objectives. In this essay by analyzing the relevant case law, I was primarily seeking the answer to whether the judges of different countries validate the universiality of the Convention with respect to damages law. In order to answear the question I have analyzed the Convention’s damages practice in relation to interpretation principles set out in Article 7. Within this I have systematically reviewed the practice of Article 74 of the Convention, analyzing a total of 144 cases from 2006 to 2016.

The revision shows that nine decisions were made during the period under review, where the court has applied national doctrine of liability, law, or practice in connection with the interpretation of Article 74. This method obviously does not promote the realization of uniformity. An internationally uniform sales law will only be realized if it is uniformly applied. For the purpose of the interpretation of the Convention, it follows that requirement the Convention’s provisions must be understood and applied autonomously, separated from their possible national roots. The legal problems discovered in this essay tries to highlight on those issues, which require more attention from the courts, thus confirming the universal character of the Convention.