|
1999年10月26日，北京某外贸公司与韩国某公司签定一份进口韩国阀门的买卖合同，其中明确规定，由北京某外贸公司代理YP公司进口韩国阀门，北京YP公司也在合同上签字确认。与此同时，韩国某公司又与其独家销售代理人YP公司签定一份出售韩国阀门的合同。前后两份合同的标的物和合同价款总额相同。在此之前，YP公司曾委托北京某外贸公司进口韩国阀门，双方签定了委托代理协议并规定，委托人向受托人支付货款，受托人收到货款后10天内对外支付货款。合同订立后，YP公司以韩国某公司交货品质有问题为由拒付货款，韩国公司遂将与其签定合同的北京某外贸公司作为被申请人向中国国际经济贸易仲裁委员会提请仲裁，要求其赔偿经济损失。On 26,Oct,1999,some interantional trade company in Beijing signed a contract with one Korean company to import valves from Korea.It said,this Beijing based company imports valves as a agent for YP,and YP signed on the contract,too.Meanwhile,this Korean company signed another buy and sell contract with YP,which act as the sole agent of the Korean valves.The two contracts concerned the same object and the same amount.There had been an agreement between YP and this trade company,it declared that YP entrusted the trade company as agent to import Korean valves for it.The pricipal should pay the cost to the agent,and the agent paid to the foreign sellers within 10 days after that.After the contract,YP refused to pay for the merchandise with reason that the quality was under demand.Then the Korean company issued to CIETAC with the Beijing trade company as the counterpart claiming for compensation.在庭审中，卖方认为买方应受本案合同约束，要求其赔偿经济损失，买方认为，本案合同应直接约束卖方和委托人YP公司，因为自己只是受托人。In the court,the seller holds the opinion that the buyer is bound by the contract and should pay the compensation,while the buyer insists that the contract is obligating both the seller and YP,instead of itself,an agent. |
