Keywords
Summary

Keywords

++++

Convention on Jurisdiction and the Enforcement of Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters ° Special jurisdiction ° Court of the place of performance of a contractual obligation ° Determination of the place of performance according to the substantive law, including, if appropriate, the uniform law on international sales, applicable according to the conflicts rules of the court seised

(Convention of 27 September 1968, Art. 5(1), as amended by the Accession Convention of 1978)

Summary

The place of performance of the obligation in question was chosen as the criterion of jurisdiction in Article 5(1) of the Convention on Jurisdiction and the Enforcement of Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters because, being precise and clear, it fits into the general aim of the Convention, which is to establish rules guaranteeing certainty as to the allocation of jurisdiction among the various national courts before which proceedings in matters relating to a contract may be brought. That criterion makes it possible for a defendant to be sued in the courts for the place of performance of the obligation in question, even where the court thus designated is not that which has the closest connection with the dispute.

The court before which the matter is brought must determine in accordance with its own rules of conflicts of laws, including, if appropriate, a uniform law, what is the law applicable to the legal relationship in question and define, in accordance with that law, the place of performance of the contractual obligation in question. Article 5(1) of the Convention, as amended by the Convention on the Accession of the Kingdom of Denmark, Ireland and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, must be interpreted as meaning that, in the case of a demand for payment made by a supplier to his customer under a contract of manufacture and supply, the place of performance of the obligation to pay the price is to be determined pursuant to the substantive law governing the obligation in dispute under the conflicts rules of the court seised, even where those rules refer to the application to the contract of provisions such as those of the Uniform Law on the International Sale of Goods, annexed to the Hague Convention of 1 July 1964.