Search

How should the law respond to the challenges of cross-border trade? Should it seek harmonization, so that all contracting parties can structure their transactions with reference to the same legal principles? Should it seek to promote legal pluralism, so that the outcome of legal disputes will best accommodate the needs and expectations of the individual parties? Or should it seek to facilitate jurisdictional competition, leaving nations to develop and apply their own national rules de-signed to attract commercial parties to the jurisdiction? This article briefly describes the three paradigms and argues that while all three goals are furthered and fostered in the Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods (CISG), none of these goals is univocally pursued at the expense of the others. The article also shows how the CISG promotes healthy jurisdictional competition, meaning competition that carries the promise of generating higher quality laws. Finally, it explores the recent trend of nation States adopting CISG principles as domestic law and tentatively concludes that the trend should further promote healthy jurisdiction.