Transcript LTU v. Eurocontrol - Masaryk University

LTU v. Eurocontrol
Iveta Rohová, Lucie Svačinová
Iva Šimková
European Private International Law
7. 3. 2012
Parties
European Organization  Lufttransportunternehmen
GmbH & Co. Kg,hereinafter
of the Safety of Air
Navigation, hereinafter
„LTU“
„Eurocontrol“
int. organization which
coordinates and plans air
traffic control for all of
Europe, seat: Belgium
 German
company which
provides air transport
Facts
• Sept. 1972, Belgium – Eurocontrol brought an action against LTU claiming
charges for the use of Eurocontrol equipment and services -> the court
decided in favor of Eurocontrol
• Aug. 1974, Germany – Eurocontrol tried to enforce this decision – during
the proceedings preliminary question to the ECJ is raised
Preliminary question
„Whether, for the purposes of interpreting the
concept 'civil and commercial matters' within the
meaning of the first paragraph of Article 1 of the
Convention, the law to be applied is the law of the
State in which judgment was given or the law of
the State in which proceedings for an order for
enforcement were issued.“
Decision of the ECJ
• Reference must be made:
– to the objectives and scheme of Convention
– to the general principles
• LTU vs Eurocontrol do not fall within
the ambit of the Convention
Key reasons of the decision
• autonomous interpretation
– the purpose of relevant EC legislation
– independence on the law of a certain State
• character of the parties of the dispute
Significance of the Decision
•
•
•
•
key decision
Autonomous (independent) interpretation of EPIL instruments
interpretation of the concept “civil and commercial matters”
In this particular case – the Brussels Convention, subsequently other
instruments
Why autonomous interpretation?
Let´s think about…
• Who adopts the law?
– The Council (+ the EP) - qualified majority vote
• Who applies the law?
– national authorities (courts) all around Europe
(27)
• How?
– In a different (their own) way (?)
• In order to achieve rights and duties deriving from EU measures are
applied uniformly and equally across the EU
Way towards uniform and harmonious application of EU law
• That is why we have the ECJ (the CJ EU) !
– Preliminary ruling
– Article 267 TFEU (Art.234 + Title IV TEC)
– Competence to interpret the Convention - special
Protocols
– Article 19 of the Preamble
+ Article 68 of the Brussels I
Regulation
Related Case Law
• Gourdain v. Nadler (133/78)
• Netherlands v. Rüffer (814/79)
• Sonntag v. Waidmann (C-172/91)
Autonomous interpretation as
an „absolute rule“ ?
Tessili v. Dunlop (12/76)
Interpretation of the notion “ the place of performance
of the obligation” (article 5/1 of the Convention, art.
5/1 a) of the Regulation)
Tips For Further Reading
• Articles of the Regulation (Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001, Reg.
Brussels I)
• Case law Brussels I Regulation (44/2001):
http://www.dutchcivillaw.com/caselaw/brusregone001.htm
• Ulrich Magnus,Peter Mankowski,Alfonso-Luis Calvo Caravaca. Brussels I
Regulation.
• John O'Brien,Raymond Smith. Conflict of Laws.
Questions ?
Thank you for your attention !
PROJECT „THEORY – SKILL – EXPERIENCE“
reg. No. CZ.1.07/2.2.00/15.0198, Operational Program Education for Competitiveness
14