Page 414 - Latent Defect or Excessive Price?Exploring Early Modern Legal Approach to Remedying Defects in Goods Exchanged for Money - Bruijn

CHAPTER EIGHT
8.3 The German Schuldrechtsmodernisierung of 2002
In 2002 the law of obligations in the German Bürgerliche Gesetzbuch (BGB 1900) was subject of a major revision. After a few decades in which proposals were made to be left gathering dust on the ministerial bookshelves, the European Directive 1999/44/EC on consumer sales provided the impetus for a whole-sale revision of the BGB's Schuldrecht.49
One of the main points of criticism about the BGB 1900 concerned the concurrence of remedies for non-performance and breach of safeguarding duties. Similar to the Dutch BW 1838, the BGB 1900 considered the duty of the seller to perform his contractual obligations and the duty to safeguard from, among other things, defects in the thing sold, as essentially different. As a result, a buyer had to choose from various remedies, if he wanted to retrieve the loss he had suffered due to a defect, eviction, or an encumbrance. As these remedies were not always in line with each other, a complex and obscure body of case law accumulated over the years, in which the Schuldrechtsmodernisierung aimed to bring light.50
The Schuldrechtsmodernisierung hoped to achieve a simpler system of remedies for breach of contract by no longer dogmatically separating the remedies for non- performance and breach of the seller's duty to safeguard from defects in the thing sold for both consumer- and non-consumer sales.51 Since 2002, it is a part of the seller's obligations under the sales contract to deliver goods free from defects (Sachmängel) and free from third-party claims (Rechtsmängel), if the sales contract so requires. In other words, the seller has to deliver in conformity with contract.52 The presence of a defect or third-party claim are both what the lawgiver newly termed instances of non-performance (Pflichtverletzung), the consequences of which are described in the general part of the law of obligations (§§ 241-432).53
The buyer of a non-conforming thing can sue for repair or replacement (Nacherfüllung), rescission or price reduction, and compensation for loss (Schadenersatz).54 The right to repair or replacement are spelled out in particular provisions concerning sales. The limitation periods for remedies for repair, replacement,
49 See Schlechtriem&Schmidt-Kessel, Schuldrecht, nos. 9-11, pp. 6-7; Zimmermann, The New German law of Obligations, p. 81; Directive 1999/44/EC had one year earlier brought the Austrian legislator to modify the ABGB's concept of Gewährleistung. See the Gewährleistungsrechts-Änderungsgesetz in BGBl, no. 48, 2001.
50 See 7.8; Maximilian, Anwendungsbereich, p. 74; Canaris, Schuldrechtsmodernisierung, passim.
51 Zimmermann, The New German law of Obligations, pp. 96-97; Behrensmeyer, Die Verjährung, p. 37.
52 § 433 (1) BGB 2002: Durch den Kaufvertrag wird der Verkäufer einer Sache verpflichtet, dem Käufer die
Sache zu übergeben und das Eigentum an der Sache zu verschaffen. Der Verkäufer hat dem Käufer die Sache frei von Sach- und Rechtsmängeln zu verschaffen; § 434 BGB 2002 (Sachmangel), § 435 (Rechtsmangel); Zimmermann, The New German law of Obligations, p. 99; Maximilian, Anwendungsbereich, p. 9.
53 Maximilian, Anwendungsbereich, p. 75.
54 § 437 BGB 2002: Ist die Sache mangelhaft, kann der Käufer, wenn die Voraussetzungen der folgenden
Vorschriften vorliegen und soweit nicht ein anderes bestimmt ist, nach § 439 Nacherfüllung verlangen, 2. nach den §§ 440, 323 und 326 Abs. 5 von dem Vertrag zurücktreten oder nach § 441 den Kaufpreis mindern und 3. nach den §§ 440, 280, 281, 283 und 311a Schadensersatz oder nach § 284 Ersatz vergeblicher Aufwendungen verlangen; §§ 280seq.
412