The author in this article deals with a significant point of irritation that affects the way that the civil law and the common law interact with each other and come together in the body of an international instrument such as the Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods (CISG). The common law approaches legal rules at a significantly lower level of abstraction than the civil law and is uncomfortable with the type of general rules that appeals to the civil law mentality. The drive to codify the law in the civil law tradition creates a need for general clauses, such as those dealing with good faith. The common law views abstract statements of this kind as jeopardizing legal certainty. In the CISG, a compromise worked out in 1980 confined good faith to the interpretation of the CISG. No duty to act in good faith was imposed on the contracting parties. Nevertheless, good faith is commonly referred to in both respects in judicial decisions but in such a way as not to make it clear what good faith means or to show why there was any need to invoke it when the case could have been settled by other means.

中文翻译：

---

诚信、普通法和《销售公约》

这篇文章中的作者处理了一个重要的刺激点，它影响了大陆法和普通法相互作用的方式，并在国际文书（如《国际货物销售合同公约》）的主体中汇集在一起（销售公约）。普通法以比民法低得多的抽象层次来处理法律规则，并且对吸引民法思维的一般规则类型感到不舒服。在大陆法传统中编纂法律的动力产生了对一般条款的需求，例如涉及善意的条款。普通法认为这种抽象的陈述会危及法律的确定性。在《销售公约》中，1980 年达成的妥协将诚意限制在《销售公约》的解释上。没有对缔约方施加诚信行事的义务。尽管如此，在司法裁决中，善意通常在两个方面都被提及，但其方式并没有明确说明善意的含义，也没有说明在案件可以通过其他方式解决的情况下为什么需要援引善意.