The given case scenario explains that the United States and Italy both are signatories to CISG. The issue can be governed under CISG if the states in the issue are the governing state or “when the rules of the private international law lead to the application of the law of the contracting state” (Butler, 2006, p.2). This can be understood as the issue brought under the “internationality” label. The contract between the two parties is brought under the international arena of commercial law. The international law is applicable for the issues until the parties have been elected out.
CISG is not applicable to this case. Because the contracts of the litigants as the distributorship agreement do not cover the information about the specific goods. It does not cover the information about which goods will be supplied. No definite terms were used regarding the price and quantity of the products. This means that for the purpose of CISG there were no specific “contracts of sales of goods” (Schroeter, 2013). Since the contract of the issue was not the contract of the sales of the goods, no analysis of the choice of law clause was applicable in this case.
The issue had arisen from the failure of the three alleged agreements between the plaintiff and the defendant. The four significant claims that Viva Vino stated are the breach of contract, promissory estoppels, unjust enrichment and tortious interference with business relations. However, the counter claim of the defendant is based on the breach of contract. The main thing that plaintiff wants to apply to the claim is that United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods, codified at 15 U.S.C.A. App. 1998 (the “CISG”), and/or Pennsylvania law should be apply for the plaintiff’s claim. Butwhat the defendant wants is to apply the Italian law.
The contractual choice of law is regarded as the standard for the contracts done between the parties. The choice of law can be part of the agreement, where two parties agree to chose a specific law related to the specific state in case of the issue.The choice of law is applicable in “In a diversity action, where the choice of law rules of the forum state [determine] which state law will be applied”. Pennsylvania’s choice of law rules includes the two main parts. The first is that court has to look if the conflict is false or true. The second is that if the conflict is true, which state has the greatest interest in the application of law.