The buyer has two legs on the obligation of taking delivery: first he has to do all the acts which could be expected of him, and secondly take over the goods, mostly physically. There is no need for a request coming from the seller to buyer to take delivery.
Lookofsky approaches the subject from the view of contractual obligations. He says that art. 31 is about seller's obligation to delivery, art. 60 is about buyer's obligation to take delivery. He finds the obligation of buyer to take delivery as a response to the seller's obligation to delivery. He explains that it is about supplying and receiving goods, which the obligations of both parties are opposing, and says, that's why he thinks that it is a contractual obligation . His explanation seems quite clear to make a logical explanation to find the obligation of the buyer to take delivery as a contractual obligation of the buyer.
Lookofsky approaches the subject from the view of contractual obligations. He says that art. 31 is about seller's obligation to delivery, art. 60 is about buyer's obligation to take delivery. He finds the obligation of buyer to take delivery as a response to the seller's obligation to delivery. He explains that it is about supplying and receiving goods, which the obligations of both parties are opposing, and says, that's why he thinks that it is a contractual obligation . His explanation seems quite clear to make a logical explanation to find the obligation of the buyer to take delivery as a contractual obligation of the buyer.