Bulk Goods Do Not Match the Chinese Supplier’s Sample: Proving the Standard and Choosing a Remedy

A sample can establish the quality promised by a Chinese supplier, but a difference between the sample and the shipment does not automatically entitle the buyer to reject the whole order. The claim needs to connect an agreed reference sample, the relevant specification, the delivered batch and an available remedy. Before returning or reworking goods, preserve that connection and send a specific notice of the mismatch.

This guide concerns commercial purchases of goods involving a Chinese supplier. The governing law, any applicable international sales convention, dispute clause and transaction dates need separate review. 中文版

1. Identify the sample that actually became the contract standard

Collect the purchase order, specifications, quotation, sample dispatch records and complete approval correspondence. Identify the sample by version, date, model and any seal or label. A prototype sent for discussion, a colour swatch and a final production sample may have different functions. If there were several rounds, establish which version was approved and whether the approval was conditional.

Make a short comparison schedule: the disputed feature; the document or sample defining it; any permitted tolerance; the delivered result; and the evidence supporting that result. Record who approved a change and the basis of that person’s authority. A message approving appearance alone should not be treated, without examining the full exchange, as approval of different materials, durability or safety performance.

Check the agreed priority between the physical sample, drawings and written specifications. If they conflict and the contract gives no clear answer, interpretation and the surrounding communications matter. Do not resolve the conflict simply by choosing whichever document now favours the claim.

2. Separate the sample obligation from the applicable legal framework

Where the United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods (CISG) applies, Article 35(1) starts with the contractual quality and description. Unless otherwise agreed, Article 35(2)(c) also requires the qualities of a sample or model held out by the seller. Article 35(3) qualifies the default obligations in paragraph 2 where the buyer knew, or could not have been unaware, of the nonconformity when contracting; it does not simply erase an express contractual promise.

If the relevant PRC domestic sales rules apply, Civil Code Article 635 provides for preservation of the reference sample and permits a quality description; delivery must match the quality of the sample and description. Article 636 addresses a different problem: when the buyer did not know about a hidden defect in the sample, matching that sample still does not dispense with the ordinary quality standard for goods of the same kind. The Civil Code has been effective since 1 January 2021.

CISG applicability depends on matters including the parties’ places of business, the transaction, relevant dates, treaty declarations and any effective exclusion. It is not established by a buyer’s nationality. The convention and domestic provisions above are alternative analytical routes where applicable, not rules to combine automatically. A sample dispute is also not necessarily a sale on approval allowing the buyer simply to change its mind.

3. Preserve a reliable comparison between sample and shipment

Keep the approved sample, its packaging and identification records. Separately identify the disputed goods by order, batch, carton and unit. Preserve arrival photographs, unpacking records, storage conditions and the history of any processing or use. If the original sample is missing, retain dispatch records, photographs, measurements and the supplier’s acknowledgements; these may help reconstruct the standard, but do not label a later replacement as the original.

Testing should address the actual disputed characteristic using an explained method and tolerance. A photograph may show a visible difference but rarely establishes material composition or load performance. Record how units were selected and how many were examined. A few failing units do not, by themselves, establish that every unit in a large batch fails.

Before destructive testing, preserve representative material and the chain of custody, and consider inviting the supplier to a documented joint inspection where practicable. A privately obtained laboratory report is evidence to assess, not automatically a binding determination. A contractually agreed inspection process or a later court or tribunal procedure may require additional steps.

4. Give a specific notice and distinguish production defects from later damage

Promptly identify the order and batch, the agreed reference, the characteristics found to differ and the material presently available. Distinguish observed facts from a cause still being investigated, request a response, and retain the complete notice and transmission records. Do not wait for a final laboratory report before considering a notice based on defects already identified.

The applicable inspection and notice rules must be checked separately: CISG Articles 38–40 and Civil Code Articles 620–622 have different conditions and exceptions. A warranty or continuing discussions do not justify assuming that every notice deadline is suspended. Our inspection, notice and evidence guide explains that sequence in more detail.

Under CISG Article 36, nonconformity existing when risk passes can remain the seller’s responsibility even if discovered later; later nonconformity caused by a breach of the seller’s obligations can also matter. Transit damage, unsuitable storage and manufacturing differences therefore need to be distinguished. An earlier inspection report requires analysis of what was actually inspected: see claims after a passed pre-shipment inspection.

5. Match the requested remedy to the proven difference

Assess the affected quantity, intended use, scope for repair or replacement, time sensitivity and evidenced loss. Under the CISG, substitute goods under Article 46(2) require a fundamental breach and a timely request; repair under Article 46(3) is also subject to conditions. The seller’s opportunity to cure under Article 48 and the requirements for avoidance under Article 49 must be considered. A mismatch alone does not establish a right to cancel the entire transaction.

Where PRC domestic law applies, Articles 617 and 582 direct attention to the agreed liability and, if that is not sufficiently determined, reasonable remedies having regard to the nature of the goods and the loss. Damages require support for causation and amount, and avoidable loss should be mitigated. Do not assume that a quality allegation authorises withholding all outstanding payments. The basis and extent of any withholding or set-off need separate review.

A repair proposal should specify the affected units, method, completion arrangements, costs and verification standard. A settlement involving a discount should identify whether any other claims are released. See repair offers and refund claims before accepting a solution or returning goods without an agreed evidence and logistics arrangement.

6. Prepare the information needed for a China-related claim review

For an initial enquiry, summarise the supplier’s legal name, order value, payment position, current location of the goods, relevant dates and your preferred outcome. Identify the sample version, the disputed characteristics and the dispute-resolution clause. Begin with a concise account; document delivery and any sensitive material can be arranged after the parties and scope are checked.

Depending on the facts, a defined engagement can address the contractual standard, evidence gaps, notice, a negotiation proposal or potential proceedings in China. Service scope and fees are confirmed before engagement; an initial enquiry does not mean representation has begun. Use the cross-border trade dispute service or contact Lawyer Pan at panjianxing46@gmail.com. For a future purchase, the China procurement legal service can address sample approval, specification priority and inspection arrangements; a later dispute is scoped separately.

Sources checked on 31 October 2026: Civil Code of the People’s Republic of China, including Articles 582, 617, 620–622 and 635–636; CISG treaty text reproduced in an official legislative schedule, including Articles 1, 6, 35–36, 38–40 and 46–49. The treaty link supplies the convention text; it does not imply that British Columbia domestic law governs the transaction. General information, subject to the actual contract, facts and applicable law.

Cover: AI-generated conceptual illustration, not a photograph of an actual client, factory or case.