Back to EUR-Lex homepage

EUR-Lex Access to European Union law

Back to EUR-Lex homepage

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

Use quotation marks to search for an "exact phrase". Append an asterisk (*) to a search term to find variations of it (transp*, 32019R*). Use a question mark (?) instead of a single character in your search term to find variations of it (ca?e finds case, cane, care).
Search tips
Need more search options? Use the Advanced search
You are here

Document 62012CN0009

Case C-9/12: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal de Commerce de Verviers (Belgium) lodged on 6 January 2012 — Corman-Collins SA v La Maison du Whisky SA

OJ C 73, 10.3.2012, p. 22–22 (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)

Date of document:
06/01/2012
Date lodged:
06/01/2012
Author:
Court of Justice
Form:
Judicial information
Authentic language:
French
Type of procedure:
Reference for a preliminary ruling
Link
Select all documents mentioning this document
Case affecting:
  • request for interpretation 32001R0044 article 02
  • request for interpretation 32001R0044 article 05 P1PTA)
  • request for interpretation 32001R0044 article 05 P1PTB)
Link

10.3.2012   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 73/22

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal de Commerce de Verviers (Belgium) lodged on 6 January 2012 — Corman-Collins SA v La Maison du Whisky SA

(Case C-9/12)

2012/C 73/38

Language of the case: French

Referring court

Tribunal de Commerce de Verviers

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Corman-Collins SA

Defendant: La Maison du Whisky SA

Questions referred

1.

Should Article 2 of Regulation No 44/2001, (1) where appropriate in conjunction with Article 5(1)(a) and (b), be interpreted as precluding a rule of jurisdiction, such as that set out in Article 4 of the Belgian Law of 27 July 1961, which provides for the jurisdiction of Belgian courts where the exclusive distributor has its registered office in Belgian territory and where the distribution agreement covers all or part of that territory, irrespective of where the grantor of the exclusive distribution rights has its registered office, where the latter is the defendant?

2.

Should Article 5(1)(a) of Regulation No 44/2001 be interpreted as meaning that it applies to an exclusive distribution of goods agreement, pursuant to which one party purchases goods from another party for resale in the territory of another Member State?

3.

If Question 2 is answered in the negative, should Article 5(1)(b) of Regulation No 44/2001 be interpreted as meaning that it refers to an exclusive distribution agreement, such as that at issue between the parties?

4.

If Questions 2 and 3 are answered in the negative, is the contested obligation in the event of the termination of an exclusive distribution agreement the obligation of the seller-grantor or that of the buyer-distributor?

(1)  Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 of 22 December 2000 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters (OJ 2001 L 12, p. 1).

Top