1 1980 United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods, S. Treaty Doc. 9, 98th Cong., 1st Sess. 22 (1983), reprinted in 19 ILM 668 (1980) [hereinafter Sales Convention]. For the certified English text, see 52 Fed. Reg. 62 (1987).

2 1980 Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction, S. Treaty Doc. 11, 99th Cong., 1st Sess. 7 (1985), reprinted in 19 ILM 1501 (1980) [hereinafter Child Abduction Convention].

3 1975 Inter-American Convention on International Commercial Arbitration, S. Treaty Doc. 12, 97th Cong., 1st Sess. 9 (1981), reprinted in 14 ILM 336 (1975) [hereinafter OAS Arbitration Convention].

4 1975 Inter-American Convention on Letters Rogatory with additional Protocol, S. Treaty Doc. 27, 98th Cong., 2d Sess. 13 (1984), reprinted in 14 ILM 339 (1975) (Convention) and 18 ILM 1238 (1979) (Protocol) [hereinafter Convention on Letters Rogatory].

5 Total unanimity in the Senate was prevented by the absence of two senators.

6 Congress authorized the United States to join the Hague Conference on Private International Law and the International Institute for the Unification of Private Law (UNIDROIT) in 1963. 22 U.S.C. §269g (1982). The United States joined the Hague Conference in October 1964 and UNIDROIT in March 1964.

7 S. Treaty Doc. 9, supra note 1, at III.

8 U.S. Mission to the United Nations, Press Backgrounder, Dec. 11, 1986. As of that date, Argentina, Egypt, France, Lesotho, Syria, Yugoslavia and Zambia had also ratified.

9 Kearney, , The United States and International Cooperation to Unify Private Law, 5 Cornell Int’l L.J. 1, 2–3 (1972)Google Scholar.

10 Pfund, , International Unification of Private Law, 19 Int’l Law. 509 (1985)Google Scholar.

11 Id.

12 Kearney, supra note 9, at 4.

13 Honnold, J., Uniform Law for International Sales 50–52 (1982)Google Scholar. This detailed analysis of the International Sales Convention is of outstanding value to lawyers who will make use of the Convention.

14 Report of the Secretary-General on the International Sale of Goods, [1966–1970] 1 UNCITRAL Y.B. 159 etseq.

15 J. Honnold, supra note 13, at 54–56.

16 S. Treaty Doc. 9, supra note 1, at VI.

17 Winship, , New Rules for International Sales, 68 A.B.A.J. 1232 (1982)Google Scholar.

18 U.C.C. §2–305 (1978).

19 Under the U.C.C. §2–206, the performance of an act may be supposed to constitute an acceptance. However, in such a case the acceptor must take steps to ensure that the other party is informed of the acceptance. The Sales Convention provides instead that the act of acceptance may be performed “without notice to the offeror” (Art. 18(3)). This requirement has to be read in light of Article 24, which lays down a general rule as to when any declaration of intention reaches the addressee.

20 See J. Honnold, supra note 13, at 316.

21 Compare U.C.C. §2-612 (1978).

22 U.C.C. §2-608 (1978).

23 Article 46(2) contains additional limitations on resort to specific performance.

24 With respect to risk of loss, Article 67(1) of the Sales Convention provides: “If the contract of sale involves carriage of the goods and the seller is not bound to hand them over at a particular place, the risk passes to the buyer when the goods are handed over to the first carrier for transmission to the buyer . . . .” The U.C.C. rule is very close to that of the Convention. The risk of loss passes to the buyer when the goods are duly delivered to the carrier even though the shipment is under reservation. U.C.C. §2-505 (1978).

25 J. Honnold, supra note 13, at 181 et seq.

26 Id. at 287–91.

27 National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Law, Uniform Child Custody Act, Handbook 194–218 (1968).

28 In preparing for the 1980 (18th) meeting, the Hague Conference sent out a questionnaire to all member states and numerous other addressees seeking information on a wide range of issues raised by childnapping. The answers served in large part as the basis for the conclusions upon which the final draft of the Convention was based. Cf. 3 Conférence de la Haye de droit International Privé, Actes et Documents de la Quatorzième Session, Child Abduction 9 et seq. (1982) [hereinafter Actes et Documents].

29 Id. at 413. The Conference rapporteur for the subject, Professor Elisa Pérez-Vera, in her report described the legal difficulties presented in the absence of a convention as follows:

15. To conclude, it can fairly be stated that the problem with which the Convention deals . . . derives all of its legal importance from the possibility of individuals establishing legal and jurisdictional links which are more or less artificial. In fact, resorting to this expedient an individual can change the applicable law and obtain a judicial decision favorable to him.

Pérez-Vera Report, id. at 426, 429.

30 Habitual residence is a term that is used widely in private international law in place of such terms as domicile. The rationale is that habitual residence may be established as a matter of fact, while domicile, for example, has legal connotations that complicate its use. An example of use in international trade law can be found in Article 10 of the International Sales Convention.

31 Both age and extent of maturity are to be taken into account. In the Convention, it should be noted, 16 years is the age of cutoff for application of the Convention (Article 4).

32 Pérez-Vera Report, supra note 29, at 434–35.

33 3 Actes et Documents, supra note 28, at 423–24.

34 There is, of course, an inherent conflict between the exercise of custodial rights and the exercise of access rights because of the opportunity that the access right affords for retention of a child. The problem is highlighted in the rapporteur’s commentary: “Above all, it must be recognized that the Convention does not seek to regulate access rights in an exhaustive manner, this would undoubtedly go beyond the scope of the Convention’s objective.” Pérez-Vera Report, supra note 29, at 465.

35 4 Actes et Documents, supra note 28, at 416.

36 Pfund, P., Address to International Bar Association 8–9 (New York, Sept. 17, 1986)Google Scholar.

37 See Letter of Submittal from Secretary of State Shultz, S. Treaty Doc. 11, supra note 2, at 6.

38 Canada ratified the Convention subject to a reservation made pursuant to Article 40 that permits a state having two or more territorial units in which different systems are applicable in respect of matters dealt with in the Convention to declare that the Convention will apply to all, one or more of its territorial units. The Convention applies to all Canadian territory except the Northwest Territory.

39 See note 3 supra.

40 Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards, done June 10, 1958, 21 UST 2517, TIAS No. 6997, 330 UNTS 3.

41 Statement of Michael F. Hoellering before the Senate Comm. on Foreign Relations 2 (June 11, 1986).

42 S. Exec. Rep. No. 21, 99th Cong., 2d Sess. 2 (1986).

43 Id.

44 S. 1828, 99th Cong., 1st Sess. 4 (1985).

45 Id. at 3.

46 Convention on the Service Abroad of Judicial and Extrajudicial Documents in Civil or Commercial Matters, done Nov. 15, 1965, 20 UST 361, TIAS No. 6638, 658 UNTS 163.

47 Letter of Transmittal from Secretary of State Shultz, S. Treaty Doc. 27, supra note 4, at III et seq.

48 Done Mar. 18, 1970, 23 UST 2555, TIAS No. 7444, 847 UNTS 231.

49 Letter of Transmittal, supra note 47, at XIII; see also p. V.

50 S. Exec. Rep. No. 21, supra note 42.

51 Letter of Transmittal, supra note 47, at III.

52 Convention Providing a Uniform Law on the Form of a Uniform Will, S. Treaty Doc. No. 29, 99th Cong., 2d Sess. (1986). For a discussion of the Convention, see Kearney, , The International Wills Convention, 18 Int’l Law. 613 (1984)Google Scholar.