Delivery, Risk and Incoterms in CISG Contracts with Turkish Companies

In international sales involving Turkish companies, delivery disputes often turn on the contract, CISG risk rules and Incoterms. A party should not assume that physical arrival, customs clearance or invoice issuance alone decides who bears the risk of loss or damage.

Delivery concerns the seller's obligation to hand over goods or place them at the buyer's disposal. Risk concerns which party bears loss or damage after a certain point. Incoterms may define delivery points, transport obligations and cost allocation, but they do not replace the entire sales contract.

CISG Articles 31 to 34 regulate delivery obligations, while Articles 66 to 70 address passing of risk. Incoterms may be incorporated by contract. Turkish domestic law may apply to issues not governed by the CISG, and transport conventions may also matter depending on shipment mode.

Disputes frequently arise because parties use Incoterms casually, omit the named place or confuse risk with title transfer. Courts and tribunals examine contract wording, transport documents, delivery records, customs documents and communications. This section deliberately avoids invented case numbers. Where a case-specific filing relies on precedent, the relevant Court of Cassation, regional appellate court or Constitutional Court materials should be checked against the current file and date of publication.

The key debate is integration. CISG, Incoterms, transport law, insurance terms and payment documents must be read together. Isolated reliance on one document may produce the wrong result.

The party alleging breach must show what delivery term applied, what happened to the goods, when the risk passed and whether the other party failed a contractual or CISG obligation.

Inspection and notice deadlines under CISG Articles 38 and 39 may begin after delivery or when examination becomes practicable. Claim deadlines under transport law or insurance policies may be shorter and should be checked immediately.

The forum depends on the dispute-resolution clause. Turkish courts or arbitral tribunals may need logistics experts where delivery, transport damage or customs events are disputed.

Evidence includes the contract, Incoterms clause, bills of lading, CMR notes, airway bills, delivery receipts, customs records, insurance policy, warehouse records, photos, inspection reports and correspondence with carriers.

The named place in an Incoterms clause can decide major issues. 'FOB Turkey' or 'CIF Europe' without precision can create disputes that were avoidable at drafting stage.

Common mistakes include using outdated Incoterms, omitting the named place, confusing delivery with payment, ignoring insurance and failing to inspect goods promptly after arrival.

Do Incoterms decide ownership?

Usually no. They mainly address delivery, risk and cost allocation.

Does customs clearance mean risk passed?

Not necessarily. The contract and Incoterms must be reviewed.

Can CISG and Incoterms apply together?

Yes. Contractual Incoterms may operate within a CISG-governed sale.

Delivery disputes are document disputes. The party with clean logistics records, clear Incoterms and timely inspection evidence usually starts stronger.

The correct legal route in these matters must be determined by reference to the date of the events, the legal position of the parties, the available evidence and the applicable statutory deadlines. Missing a deadline, applying to the wrong authority or presenting evidence in the wrong procedural form may cause loss of rights. You may contact Günser + Partners for an assessment of your matter under current Turkish legislation and court practice.