EEC - Judicial cooperation in civil matters - Jurisdiction and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters - Council Regulation (EC) No. 44/2001 - Jurisdiction / General rules – Defendant not domiciled on the territory of a given Member State – Jurisdiction governed by the legislation of said Member State subject to the application of rules on exclusive jurisdiction – Dispute concerning the validity of a decision by the bodies of a company established in one Member State between said company and a company established in a third country - Application of Article 22(2) of the regulation in determining which court has jurisdiction

The Cour de Cassation very solemnly ruled that in order to be able to assess the applicability ratione loci of Council Regulation (EC) No. 44/2001 where the defendant is not domiciled in a Member State, it must be determined whether Article 22 on exclusive jurisdiction and Article 23 on prorogation of jurisdiction are applicable before applying domestic rules on international jurisdiction.

One of these articles was indeed applicable in the case in point, which concerned a dispute between a company established in France and a Canadian company and related to the validity of a decision made by the bodies of the French company (about an agreement to transfer property rights over a trademark). Article 22(2) of Council Regulation (EC) No. 44/2001 was applicable to the matter and gave the French courts jurisdiction.