Main Article Content


There are differences in risk allocation in agreements under the civil law and common law systems. However, similar case law on overseas sales in international business law remain apparent. Therefore, INCOTERMS has a significant impact in this regard. In addition, this effect is sometimes seen in determining the ownership rights as well. The question here is how can the same result from the viewpoint of the passing of risk and property be obtained for all parties in international business law. In this study, the Author used a comparative method by comparing the French, German, Turkish, and English laws, and the United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods on risk allocation in the sale of goods. Also, case laws were analyzed and compared to find out the main differences in practice. In addition, the effects of the use or absence of INCOTERMS in practice were discussed. As a result, it is better to utilize the Free on Board; and Cost, Insurance and Freight INCOTERMS, as well as the jurisdiction clauses in their contracts for business parties to reach the same result in terms of the passing of risk and property.
Keywords: Risk Allocation, Ownership, INCOTERMS.

Alokasi Risiko Dalam Hukum Bisnis Internasional, Eropa, Dan Turki

Ada perbedaan dalam alokasi risiko dalam perjanjian di bawah hukum perdata dan sistem hukum umum. Namun, kasus hukum serupa tentang penjualan di luar negeri dalam hukum bisnis internasional tetap terlihat. Oleh karena itu, INCOTERMS memiliki dampak yang signifikan dalam hal ini. Selain itu, efek ini terkadang terlihat dalam menentukan hak kepemilikan juga. Pertanyaannya di sini adalah bagaimana hasil yang sama dari sudut pandang pengalihan risiko dan properti dapat diperoleh untuk semua pihak dalam hukum bisnis internasional. Dalam penelitian ini, Penulis menggunakan metode komparatif dengan membandingkan hukum Perancis, Jerman, Turki, dan Inggris, dan United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods tentang alokasi risiko dalam penjualan barang. Juga, hukum kasus dianalisis dan dibandingkan untuk mengetahui perbedaan utama dalam praktiknya. Selain itu, efek dari penggunaan atau tidak adanya INCOTERMS dalam praktik juga dibahas. Akibatnya, lebih baik menggunakan Free on Board; dan Biaya, Asuransi dan INCOTERMS Pengangkutan, serta klausul yurisdiksi dalam kontrak mereka untuk pihak bisnis untuk mencapai hasil yang sama dalam hal pengalihan risiko dan properti.
Kata kunci: Alokasi Risiko, Kepemilikan, INCOTERMS.


Risk Allocation Ownership INCOTERMS

Article Details

How to Cite
Caglar Sahin. (2023). Risk Allocation In International, European, And Turkish Business Law. Prophetic Law Review, 5(1), 61–78.


  1. Carlos Federspiel & Co v Charles Twigg & Co [1957] 1 Lloyd's Rep 240. 

  2. Tarling v Baxter (1827) 6 B & C 360, 108 ER 484. 

  3. Paris Court of Appeal, 1st Chamber, Section D, 97/25212, 18.03.1998. 

  4. German Federal Supreme Court, VIII ZR 108/12, 07.11.2012.

  5. Tribunal of International Arbitration at the Russian Federation Chamber of Commerce and Industry, 255/1996, 02.09.1997.   

  6. BP Oil Int’l, Ltd. v. Empresa Estatal Petroleos de Ecuador, 332 F.3d 333 (5th Cir. 2003). 

  7. St. Paul Guardian Ins. Co. v. Neuromed Med. Sys. Support, GmbH, No. 00 Civ. 9344, 2002 U.S. Dist. Lexis 5096 (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 26, 2002). 

  8. 7th Civil Chamber of the Turkish Court of Cassation, 2013/659, 31.01.2013.

  9. United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods (adopted 11 April 1980, entered into force 1 January 1988) 1489 UNTS 3.

  10. French Civil Code (Version of 6 February 2023).

  11. German Civil Code in the version promulgated on 2 January 2002 (Federal Law Gazette [Bundesgesetzblatt] I page 42, 2909; 2003 I page 738), last amended by Article 4 para. 5 of the Act of 1 October 2013 (Federal Law Gazette I page 3719).

  12. German Commercial Code in the revised version published in the Bundesgesetzblatt (BGBl., Federal Law Gazette), Part III, Section 4100-1, Book 1, as amended by Article 11 of the Act of 18 July 2017 (Federal Law Gazette Part I p. 2745), Book 2, as amended by Article 14 of the Act of 22 December 2020 (Federal Law Gazette Part I p. 3256), Book 3, as amended by Article 5 of the Act of 7 August 2021 (Federal Law Gazette Part I p. 3311), Book 4, as amended by Article 184 of the Act of 19 June 2020 (Federal Law Gazette Part I p. 1328) and Book 5, as amended by Article 184 of the Act of 19 June 2020 (Federal Law Gazette Part I p. 1328).

  13. Turkish Civil Code, Law No: 4721, Date of Acceptance: 22.11.2001, Date and Issue of Official Gazette: 08.12.2001/24607.

  14. Turkish Code of Obligations, Law No: 6098, Date of Acceptance: 11.01.2011, Date and Issue of Official Gazette: 04.02.2011/27836.

  15. Turkish Commercial Code, Law No: 6102, Date of Acceptance: 13.01.2011, Date and Issue of Official Gazette: 14.02.2011/27846.

  16. Sale of Goods Act 1979.

  17. Uniform Laws on International Sales Act 1967.

  18. The Government Bill on the Turkish Code of Obligations and Report of the Justice Commission,(1/499), 2008.

  19. The Government Bill on the Turkish Commercial Code and Report of the Justice Commission,(1/324), 2007.

  20. Andersen CB. “Macro-Systematic Interpretation of Uniform Commercial Law: The Interrelation of the CISG and Other Uniform Sources” in Andre Janssen and Olaf Meyer (eds). CISG Methodology (Sellier 2009).

  21. Erauw J. “Observations on passing of risk” in Franco Ferrari, Harry Flechtner, and Ronald A. Brand (eds). The Draft Uncitral Digest and Beyond: Cases, Analysis and Unresolved Issues in the UN Sales Convention (Sellier 2004).

  22. Kouladis NPrinciples of Law Relating to International Trade (Springer 2006).

  23. McGuire MR, “National Report on the Transfer of Movables in Germany” in Faber Wolfgang and Brigitta Lurger (eds). National Reports on the Transfer of Movables in Europe: Germany, Greece, Lithuania, Hungary (Sellier 2011).

  24. Schaffer R, Agusti F, and Dhooge LJ. International Business Law and Its Environment (9 edn, Cengage Learning, 2014).

  25. Zhou Q. “The CISG and English Sales Law: An Unfair Competition” in Larry A. DiMatteo (ed), International Sales Law: A Global Challenge (Cambridge University Press 2014).

  26. Başlangıç SÖ. 'Main Features of Changes in INCOTERMS 2010' (2015) 4(5) Manas Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi.

  27. Coetzee J, 'Incoterms and the Lex Mercatoria' (2010) 1(12) Cadernos da Escola de Direito e Relações Internacionais da UniBrasil.

  28. Demir B. 'Transition of Damage in Contract of Sale' [2014] 3(5) International Journal of Social Sciences.

  29. Günaydın ÖE, 'Incoterms 2000, 2010 ve 2020 Revizyonlarına Genel Bakış' [2021] 11(2) Çankırı Karatekin Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi.

  30. Karibi-Botoye I, Enwukwe NE and Timothy BB, 'An Appraisal of The Passing of Risk in The International Sale of Goods Under International Chamber of Commerce Terms (Incoterms)' (2022) 2(2) The Journal of International Trade Law & Contemporary Issues.

  31. Kayibanda R, 'Passing of Property in Goods in Contracts of International Sale of Goods' [2013] 14(2) The Estey Centre Journal of International Law and Trade Policy.

  32. Kim JH. . 'The Comparative Study of Incoterms 2020 and 2010 in International Physical Distribution' (2022) 20(4) Journal of Distribution Science 102.

  33. Polat G. 'Uluslararası Ticarette Risk Yönetimi Bağlamında Incoterms 2020 Kuralları Üzerine Bir Değerlendirme' (2021) 23(2) Afyon Kocatepe Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi 219.

  34. Roth WV and Roth WV. 'Incoterms: Facilitating Trade in the Asian Pacific' (1997) 18(3) University of Pennsylvania Journal of International Law.

  35.  Valioti Z. 'Passing of Risk in International Sale Contracts: A Comparative Examination of the Rules on Risk Under the United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods (Vienna 1980) and INCOTERMS 2000' (2004) (2) Nordic Journal of Commercial Law.

  36. Al-Anbaki MHK. ‘Passing of property in C.I.F. & F.O.B. contracts (comparative study)’ (Ph.D. thesis, University of Glasgow 1978).

  37. Coetzee J. ‘INCOTERMS as a form of standardization in international sales law: an analysis of the interplay between mercantile custom and substantive sales law with specific reference to the passing of risk’ (Ph.D. thesis, University of Stellenbosch 2010).

  38. Laemmli T, ‘Transfer of Ownership in International Sales of Goods’ (Master Thesis, University of Cape Town 2014).

  39. Özgür Ç, ‘Milletlerarası Mal Satım Sözleşmelerinde Hasarın İntikali’ (Master Thesis, Erciyes University 2012).

  40. Sarıaslan D, ‘Satım Sözleşmesinde Hasarın Geçişi’ (Master Thesis, Ankara University 2014).

  41. Kritzer AH. 'CISG: Table of Contracting States' (Gizem Alper ed, Pace-IICL, 2022) <> accessed 5 February 2023.

  42. Tamas F, 'International Business Law: Transportation' [2016] (1) E-learning System of the University of Debrecen.

  43. Scottish Law Commission. ‘Sale of Goods Forming Part of a Bulk’ (Scot Law Com No 145, 1993).

  44. UNCITRAL, Digest of Case Law on the United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods (United Nations 2012) < > accessed 3 February 2023.