Notice to K. BV Insufficient: Claimants Dispute Contract Avoidance

The Claimants contend that the notice sent by the Respondent to K. BV does not fulfill the requirement to avoid the contracts between the parties. The notice to K. BV does not constitute notice to the sellers, unless K. BV is expressly authorized to act on behalf of the Respondent. It is crucial to determine whether K. BV had the necessary authority from the Respondent.

Furthermore, the fact that the Claimant was informed by K. BV does not indicate that the Respondent has fulfilled its obligation to notify the Claimant about the alleged non-conformity issue concerning the Rijn Blend. In essence, the Claimants argue that direct communication between the contractual parties is of utmost importance. They stress that the notice received through K. BV does not satisfy the Respondent's obligation to inform the Claimants about the purported non-conformity issue related to the Rijn Blend.