Answered You can hire a professional tutor to get the answer.
US manufacturer, "USCo," manufactures stepladders. They contract with a company in France,"FrenchCo," to sell 1,000 stepladders for the French...
US manufacturer, "USCo," manufactures stepladders. They contract with a company in France,"FrenchCo," to sell 1,000 stepladders for the French hardware store to sell in its stores. The French hardware store sends a purchase order for 1,000 stepladders to US Co, delivery on November 1, 2017. The cost per stepladder is US $100 for a total purchase of US $100,000. All this information is listed on the purchase order. USCo sends back a confirmation of the terms. All material terms on this confirmation by USCo mirror the terms on the French hardware store'spurchase order. However, on neither the purchase order, nor the confirmation sheet by USCo are there written provisions for venue or choice of law in case there is a disagreement or breach of contract.
The French hardware store receives the stepladders on November 1, 2017 and they perform a cursory inspection of the goods a day later. The stepladders seem to be fine, and they are placed out for purchase at the hardware store a week later.
Six months later, the French hardware store begins to have many of its patrons come back with broken and bent stepladders that were manufactured by USCo. They want their money back or a store credit to purchase a different stepladder.
French hardware store wants to sue USCo for a fundamental breach of contract, and they want to sue them in the local French civil courts. They bring an action to this court for breach of warranty of merchantability.
Note that France and the US are signatories to the CISG.
2a) Can the FrenchCo sue USCo, under this theory? Fully explain.
2b) If a suit is allowed, what are the damages that FrenchCo can sue for?
2c) Does the local French civil courts have jurisdiction over this suit? Why or why not?
