-   Preface  
-   Overview  
-   Abbreviations  
-   § 1: Introduction   -  I. Outline of the problem  -  1. Unharmonized domestic sales law and property law 
-  2. CISG and national property law 
 
-   II. Outline of the study  
-  III. Remarks on methodology  -  1. History of unified sales law, the accessible material, and its usefulness in interpreting the CISG  -  a) Unidroit: 1928–1951 
-  b) Conference in The Hague in 1951 and the Special Commission 
-  c) ULIS and ULF 
-  d) Usefulness of historical records 
 
-  2. Comparative law pre- and post-unification 
-  3. Summary 
 
 
-   § 2: Groundwork   -   I. Terminology  
-  II. Notions of property  -  1. Absolute notion of property on the European continent 
-  2. Relative, absolute, and otherwise different notions of property under Roman law 
-  3. Relative notion of property 
-  4. Reduced significance of a “lump” concept of property  -  a) Nordic countries 
-  b) USA and its UCC 
 
-  5. Summary 
 
-  III. Differences in the transfer of property with regard to sales transactions  -  1. Transfer of property due to mere consent or additional requirement of handing over of the goods 
-  2. Causal or abstract relationship between transfer of property and the sales contract 
 
-  IV. Law applicable to questions of property  -  1. Law applicable to questions of property before State courts 
-  2. Law applicable to questions of property before arbitral tribunals 
 
-   V. Conclusion  
 
-   § 3: Obligation to transfer the property and third party rights or claims   -  I. Distinguishing different obligations to transfer the property  -  1. Obligation to transfer unencumbered property 
-  2. Obligation to fulfill the necessary acts for the transfer of property 
 
-  II. Historical roots and comparative law  -  1. Roman law  -  a) Actio auctoritatis, stipulatio duplae, stipulatio habere licere, and obligation to transfer property 
-  b) Explanatory approaches 
 
-  2. National laws  -  a) French law  -  aa) Garantie d’éviction and Articles 1626 et seq. of the French Civil Code 
-  bb) Nullity of the sale of goods that belong to a third party under Article 1599 of the French Civil Code 
-  cc) Summary 
 
-  b) Swiss law  -  aa) Articles 184 and 192 et seq. of the Swiss Code of Obligations 
-  bb) Opinions by the Swiss courts and scholars 
-  cc) Position of the Swiss Supreme Court 
-  dd) Discussion  -  (1) Protection of the buyer before eviction 
-  (2) Systematic arguments 
-  (3) Revealing the respective historical background of the Swiss Code of Obligations 
 
-  ee) Summary regarding the obligation to transfer the property 
-  ff) Nullity due to impossibility and Article 20 of the Swiss Code of Obligations 
 
-  c) English law  -  aa) Section 12(1) of the Sale of Goods Act 1893 and 1979 
-  bb) Failure of consideration 
-  cc) Summary 
 
 
-  3. The breakthrough of German law?  -  a) Germanic and Franconian law 
-  b) The German Civil Code of 1900 
-  c) Breakthrough of German law by introducing the obligation to transfer the property? 
 
-  4. Summary 
 
-  III. Current interpretations of Articles 30 and 41 of the CISG  -  1. Approach 1: Buyer has to become owner of the goods under Article 30 of the CISG 
-  2. Approach 2: Article 30 of the CISG obliges the seller to fulfill the necessary acts under national law to effect a transfer of property 
-  3. Approach 3: Article 30 of the CISG is merely an overview elaborated by Article 41 of the CISG and contains no independent obligation 
 
-  IV. A novel approach: Defining “property” under Article 30 of the CISG and applying Article 41 of the CISG with regard to third parties only  -  1. Defining “property” under Article 30 of the CISG  -  a) Deriving the meaning of “property” from existing concepts 
-  b) Proposed definition of property under Article 30 of the CISG 
-  c) “Transfer” of property 
-  d) Intellectual property rights 
-  e) Accessories to the goods 
 
-  2. Advantages of this approach  -  a) The wording of Article 41 of the CISG and third parties 
-  b) Uniformity and Article 7(1) of the CISG 
-  c) Improved delineation of Articles 30 and 41 of the CISG  -  aa) Relevant point(s) in time  -  (1) Relevant point in time under Article 30 of the CISG 
-  (2) Relevant point in time under Article 41 of the CISG 
-  (3) Advantages of a distinction regarding the relevant point in time 
-  (4) Summary 
 
-  bb) Assessing modifications of both obligations under Article 6 of the CISG 
-  cc) Claim for performance under Article 46(1) or 46(2), (3) of the CISG 
-  dd) Article 43 of the CISG 
 
-  d) Summary 
 
-  3. Consequences for the type of obligation found in Article 30 of the CISG 
-  4. Obligation to transfer unencumbered property under Article 41 of the CISG  -  a) Wording and the additional protection from claims of third parties  -  aa) Can there be a breach of contract by a right that is not at the same time a claim?  -  (1) Relevant point in time for the claim or the facts underlying the claim to exist 
-  (2) Bona fide purchaser 
-  (3) Threshold for existence of “claims”  -   (a) Frivolous or obviously unfounded claims of third parties  
-   (b) Against whom must the claim be raised?  
-   (c) (No) requirements of a “claim” that surpasses a mere expression of a third party to have a right in the goods  
 
-  (4) Summary 
 
-  bb) Are there buyers’ remedies for claims of third parties more limited than the remedies for rights of third parties?  -  (1) Claim for performance under Article 46 of the CISG and reduction of price under Article 50 of the CISG 
-  (2) Avoidance of contract under Articles 49(1)(a), 25 of the CISG 
-  (3) Prescription 
 
-  cc) Summary 
 
-  b) Purpose of Article 41 of the CISG 
-  c) Travaux préparatoires  
-  d) Summary 
 
-  5. Broader protection for buyers under the CISG than a mere obligation to transfer unencumbered property 
-  6. Preemption of remedies under national law regarding the non-transfer of property 
-  7. Applying the novel approach in direct comparison to approaches 1–3 
-  8. Summary 
 
-   V. Outlook on unifications of law and specifically European law  
 
-  § 4: Property and the characterization of a sales contract under the CISG  -   I. Status quo and general opinion under the CISG  
-   II. Transfer of property as understood under national laws is no necessary element of characterization of sales contracts under the CISG  
-  III. Transfer of property under Article 30 of the CISG is no necessary element of characterization of sales contracts under the CISG  -  1. The Res Cogitans and English sales law  -  a) The case 
-  b) Reception in the English literature  -  aa) Property-transfer for a nanosecond (scintilla temporis) 
-  bb) Functional interpretation of the retention of title clause 
-  cc) Conditional contract of sale of bunkers 
-  dd) Party autonomy in characterizing the contract 
 
 
-  2. The reasoning of The Res Cogitans and the CISG  -  a) Property-transfer for a nanosecond and functional analysis of the retention of property clause 
-  b) Conditional contract of sale 
-  c) Party autonomy in characterizing the contract 
 
-  3. Property as part of the definition of a CISG contract 
 
-  IV. Proposed characterization of a sales contract under Article 1(1) of the CISG  -  1. Delivery of the goods is not a necessary component of a sales contract 
-  2. Benefits and risk of the goods as central elements 
-  3. Applying the proposed definition of a sales contract under the CISG 
 
-   V. Conclusion  
-   VI. Outlook on unifications of law and specifically European law  
 
-   § 5: Property and the claim for the purchase price   -  I. Property in the goods and action for the price in the common law  -  1. English law and legal systems that are inspired by the Sale of Goods Act 1979  -  a) Historical roots 
-  b) Current English law 
-  c) The Res Cogitans and future English law 
 
-  2. Other common law jurisdictions 
-  3. Different motives for the shaping of the claim for the purchase price in the USA 
-  4. Summary 
 
-  II. Continental European laws’ approach exemplified by German law  -  1. German law in theory 
-  2. Practice of the courts 
-  3. Consumer laws 
-  4. Summary 
 
-   III. Summary of national concepts  
-  IV. Claiming the price under the CISG  -  1. Article 62 of the CISG  -  a) Notable widening of scope of Article 62 of the CISG compared to Article 61(2) of the ULIS 
-  b) No limitation of the claim for the price under Article 77 of the CISG 
-  c) No limitation of the claim for the price under Articles 85, 87 of the CISG 
-  d) No limitation of the claim for the price under Article 88 of the CISG 
-  e) Possible limitation of the claim for the price under Article 9(2) of the CISG 
-  f) Limitation of the claim for the price under Article 58 of the CISG 
-  g) Limitation of the claim for the price under Article 7(1) of the CISG 
-  h) Summary 
 
-  2. Damages claim instead of the claim for the price  -  a) Article 77 of the CISG after extinction of performance claim 
-  b) Article 77 of the CISG while claim for performance still exists and is due  -  aa) Article 77 of the CISG and damages due to delay  -  (1) Storage costs 
-  (2) Financing costs 
-  (3) Summary 
 
-  bb) Approach 1: Article 77 of the CISG generally requires a resale if the buyer refuses to perform 
-  cc) Approach 2: Article 77 of the CISG does not generally require a resale if the buyer refuses to perform 
-  dd) Discussion 
 
-  c) Summary 
 
-  3. Article 28 of the CISG and the claim for the price under Article 62 of the CISG  -  a) Applicability of Article 28 of the CISG to the claim for the price under Article 62 of the CISG  -  aa) Potential consequences if Article 28 of the CISG were applicable to the claim for the price under Article 62 of the CISG  -  (1) (Im)possibility to force the buyer to pay the price in a foreign currency 
-  (2) (Im)possibility to force the goods de facto onto the buyer 
-  (3) (No) indirect duty of the buyer to resell the goods  -   (a) Solea International BVBA v Basset & Walker International Inc  
-   (b) Law applicable to calculation of the damages  
-   (c) Influence of Article 28 of the CISG on Article 77 of the CISG  
 
-  (4) Summary 
 
-  bb) Arguments for and against the application of Article 28 of the CISG to the claim for the price  -  (1) Wording of Article 28 of the CISG 
-  (2) Systematic interpretation 
-  (3) Travaux préparatoires 
-  (4) Purpose of Article 28 of the CISG 
-  (5) Result 
 
 
-  b) Application of its “own” law with regard to the claim for the purchase price 
-  c) Summary 
 
 
-   V. Conclusion  
 
-   § 6: Exclusion under Article 4, sentence 2(b) of the CISG   -  I. Effect on “property” under Article 4, sentence 2(b) of the CISG  -  1. “Property” as an autonomous term under Article 4, sentence 2(b) of the CISG 
-  2. Indirect relevance of the CISG on the transfer by way of incidental questions 
 
-  II. Retention of property clauses  -  1. Effects on property in the goods excluded under Article 4, sentence 2(b) of the CISG 
-  2. Effects on contractual rights and obligations not excluded under Article 4, sentence 2(b) of the CISG 
-  3. Consent regarding the retention of property clause under Articles 14–24 of the CISG or under national law? 
-  4. Summary 
 
-  III. The CISG’s position on parties’ agreements to regulate the transfer of property  -  1. (No) mandatory character of Article 4, sentence 2(b) of the CISG 
-  2. Regulating the transfer of property under Article 6 of the CISG 
-  3. Relevance of parties’ agreement outside of the CISG 
 
-   IV. No contradiction between Article 4, sentence 2(b) CISG and Articles 30, 41 of the CISG  
-   V. Suitability of the exclusion under Article 4, sentence 2(b) of the CISG  
-   VI. Conclusion  
 
-   § 7: Remedies based on (national) property law   -   I. Different approaches regarding claims based on property under national law  
-   II. Claims by or against third parties  
-  III. Claims between the seller and the buyer  -  1. Buyer’s claim based on property after contract conclusion 
-  2. Seller’s claims based on property after avoidance of contract 
-  3. Seller’s claims based on a retention of property clause 
 
-   IV. Conclusion  
 
-   § 8: Insolvency and property in the goods   -   I. Elevated relevance of property in insolvency cases  
-   II. The CISG does not supersede national insolvency law on the available assets for distribution and priorities  
-  III. (No) indirect influence on seller’s property after avoidance of contract by the CISG  -  1. Schlechtriem and the causa surviving contract avoidance 
-  2. Landfermann, Hornung, Krebs, Claude Witz arguing for the irrelevance of the CISG 
-  3. Discussion  -  a) Challenging the premise of the continuing existence of a causa for purposes of national property law as a matter governed by the CISG 
-  b) Challenging the premise of an incidental question to the applicable contract law  -  aa) The correct methodology of incidental questions is not decisive 
-  bb) Introducing a discussion on the same problem in private international law literature 
-  cc) Contrat translatif as a requirement under the national property law 
 
-  c) Advantages of the proposed interpretation for the CISG 
 
-  4. Summary 
 
-   IV. Conclusion  
 
-   § 9: Conclusions and theses   -   I. Conclusions  
-   II. Theses  
 
-   Index of authorities  
-   Index of further material  
-  Index of cases