EUR-Lex Access to European Union law
This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62010CA0384
Case C-384/10: Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 15 December 2011 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Hof van Cassatie van België (Belgium)) — Jan Voogsgeerd v Navimer SA (Rome Convention on the law applicable to contractual obligations — Contract of employment — Choice made by the parties — Mandatory rules of the law applicable in the absence of choice — Determination of that law — Employee carrying out his work in more than one Contracting State)
Case C-384/10: Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 15 December 2011 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Hof van Cassatie van België (Belgium)) — Jan Voogsgeerd v Navimer SA (Rome Convention on the law applicable to contractual obligations — Contract of employment — Choice made by the parties — Mandatory rules of the law applicable in the absence of choice — Determination of that law — Employee carrying out his work in more than one Contracting State)
Case C-384/10: Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 15 December 2011 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Hof van Cassatie van België (Belgium)) — Jan Voogsgeerd v Navimer SA (Rome Convention on the law applicable to contractual obligations — Contract of employment — Choice made by the parties — Mandatory rules of the law applicable in the absence of choice — Determination of that law — Employee carrying out his work in more than one Contracting State)
OJ C 39, 11.2.2012, p. 4–5
(BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)
|
11.2.2012 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 39/4 |
Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 15 December 2011 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Hof van Cassatie van België (Belgium)) — Jan Voogsgeerd v Navimer SA
(Case C-384/10) (1)
(Rome Convention on the law applicable to contractual obligations - Contract of employment - Choice made by the parties - Mandatory rules of the law applicable in the absence of choice - Determination of that law - Employee carrying out his work in more than one Contracting State)
(2012/C 39/06)
Language of the case: Dutch
Referring court
Hof van Cassatie van België
Parties to the main proceedings
Applicant: Jan Voogsgeerd
Defendant: Navimer SA
Re:
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Hof van Cassatie van België — Interpretation of Article 6(2)(b) of the Convention on the law applicable to contractual obligations, opened for signature in Rome on 19 June 1980 (OJ 1980 L 266, p. 1) — Law applicable in the absence of choice — Contract of employment — Worker not habitually carrying out his work in one single country — Chief marine engineer
Operative part of the judgment
|
1. |
Article 6(2) of the Convention on the law applicable to contractual obligations, opened for signature in Rome on 19 June 1980, must be interpreted as meaning that the national court seised of the case must first establish whether the employee, in the performance of his contract, habitually carries out his work in the same country, which is the country in which or from which, in the light of all the factors which characterise that activity, the employee performs the main part of his obligations towards his employer. |
|
2. |
In the case where the national court takes the view that it cannot rule on the dispute before it under Article 6(2)(a) of that convention, Article 6(2)(b) of the Rome Convention must be interpreted as follows:
|