HANWHA CORP. v. CEDAR PETROCHEMICALS, INC. Case Brief
Complete case briefs with LSD+
Every LSD.Law brief pairs a full IRAC analysis with opinion summaries at three levels of depth, written by a team of Harvard Law and MIT graduates - a quick synopsis when you are pressed for time, the complete reasoning when you need to go deep.
Adaptive Case Views
Toggle between Flash, Standard, and Expanded. Get what you need, when you need it.
Exam-Ready IRAC Format
We deliver the precise structure professors look for in exam answers.
Complex Cases, Clarified
We break down dense legal reasoning into something digestible, helping you grasp core concepts.
Case Brief Summary & Legal Analysis
tl;dr: Two international corporations agreed on price and quantity for a chemical sale but disputed the governing law. The court, applying the CISG, held that no contract was formed because the parties’ prior dealings showed that agreement on the choice-of-law clause was a required step before a binding agreement existed.
Legal Significance: Under the CISG, a contract is not formed if parties fail to agree on a choice-of-law provision when their established course of dealing demonstrates that such a term is a material part of their final agreement, preventing a contract from arising from price and quantity alone.
HANWHA CORP. v. CEDAR PETROCHEMICALS, INC. Law School Study Guide
Use this case brief structure for your own legal analysis. Focus on the IRAC methodology to excel in law school exams and cold calls.
Case Facts & Court Holding
Key Facts & Case Background
Hanwha Corp., a Korean company, and Cedar Petrochemicals, Inc., a New York company, had a history of twenty prior transactions. Their established practice involved a two-step process: first, agreeing on a “firm bid” for product, quantity, and price; second, finalizing a comprehensive contract sheet sent by Cedar, which included a New York choice-of-law provision. For the twenty-first transaction involving the petrochemical Toluene, the parties agreed to a firm bid. Cedar sent its standard contract documents. Hanwha returned a modified version, striking the New York law provision and substituting Singapore law. Hanwha’s accompanying email stated that no contract would “enter into force” unless Cedar countersigned its version. Cedar refused to accept the changes and, after the market price for Toluene increased significantly, informed Hanwha that no contract existed. Hanwha sued for breach of contract.
Court Holding & Legal Precedent
Issue: Under the United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods (CISG), is a binding contract formed when parties agree on product, quantity, and price but fail to agree on a choice-of-law provision, contrary to their established course of dealing?
No, a binding contract was not formed. The parties’ extensive course of Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur.
IRAC Legal Analysis
About IRAC analysis
IRAC (Issue, Rule, Analysis, Conclusion) is the structure professors expect in exam answers. Each LSD.Law brief states the issue, the governing rule with citations, the court's application of that rule, and the conclusion - the same reasoning pattern you will use on exams and in practice.
Legal Issue
Under the United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods (CISG), is a binding contract formed when parties agree on product, quantity, and price but fail to agree on a choice-of-law provision, contrary to their established course of dealing?
Conclusion
This case demonstrates that under the CISG, a prior course of dealing Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ull
Legal Rule
A contract is formed under CISG Article 14 only if a proposal Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excep
Legal Analysis
The court first established that the CISG governed the dispute. Although both Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui
Flash-to-Full Case Opinions
Flash Summary
- The CISG governs contract formation when parties from signatory nations fail