This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62000CJ0437
Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 10 April 2003. # Giulia Pugliese v Finmeccanica SpA, Betriebsteil Alenia Aerospazio. # Reference for a preliminary ruling: Landesarbeitsgericht München - Germany. # Brussels Convention - Article 5(1) - Court for the place of performance of the contractual obligation - Contract of employment - Place where the employee habitually carries out his work - First contract fixing the place of performance of the work in one Contracting State - Second contract concluded with reference to the first contract and under which the employee carries out his work in another Contracting State - First contract suspended during the performance of the second. # Case C-437/00.
Hotărârea Curții (camera a cincea) din data de 10 aprilie 2003.
Giulia Pugliese împotriva Finmeccanica SpA, Betriebsteil Alenia Aerospazio.
Cerere având ca obiect pronunțarea unei hotărâri preliminare: Landesarbeitsgericht München - Germania.
Convenția de la Bruxelles.
Cauza C-437/00.
Hotărârea Curții (camera a cincea) din data de 10 aprilie 2003.
Giulia Pugliese împotriva Finmeccanica SpA, Betriebsteil Alenia Aerospazio.
Cerere având ca obiect pronunțarea unei hotărâri preliminare: Landesarbeitsgericht München - Germania.
Convenția de la Bruxelles.
Cauza C-437/00.
ECLI identifier: ECLI:EU:C:2003:219
*A9* Landesarbeitsgericht München, Beschluß vom 11/02/2000 (10 Sa 485/00)
- Die deutsche Rechtsprechung auf dem Gebiete des internationalen Privatrechts im Jahre 2000 p.247-251
- Franzen, Martin: The European Legal Forum 2001 p.295-298 (D, EN)
- Franzen, Martin: The European Legal Forum 2001 p.296-298 (I)
- Franzen, Martin: The European Legal Forum 2001 p.295-298 (D, EN)
- Franzen, Martin: The European Legal Forum 2001 p.296-298 (I)
«(Brussels Convention – Article 5(1) – Court for the place of performance of the contractual obligation – Contract of employment – Place where the employee habitually carries out his work – First contract fixing the place of performance of the work in one Contracting State – Second contract concluded with reference to the first contract and under which the employee carries out his work in another Contracting State – First contract suspended during the performance of the second)»
|
||||
|
||||
(Brussels Convention of 27 September 1968, Article 5(1), as amended by the Accession Conventions of 1978, 1982 and 1989)
JUDGMENT OF THE COURT (Fifth Chamber)
10 April 2003(1)
((Brussels Convention – Article 5(1) – Court for the place of performance of the contractual obligation – Contract of employment – Place where the employee habitually carries out his work – First contract fixing the place of performance of the work in one Contracting State – Second contract concluded with reference to the first contract and under which the employee carries out his work in another Contracting State – First contract suspended during the performance of the second))
In Case C-437/00,
REFERENCE to the Court under the Protocol of 3 June 1971 on the interpretation by the Court of Justice of the Convention of 27 September 1968 on Jurisdiction and the Enforcement of Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters by the Landesarbeitsgericht München (Germany) for a preliminary ruling in the proceedings pending before that court between Giulia Puglieseand
Finmeccanica SpA, Alenia Aerospazio Division, on the interpretation of Article 5(1) of the abovementioned Convention of 27 September 1968 (OJ 1978 L 304, p. 36), as amended by the Convention of 9 October 1978 on the Accession of the Kingdom of Denmark, Ireland and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (OJ 1978 L 304, p. 1 and ─ amended version ─ p. 77), by the Convention of 25 October 1982 on the Accession of the Hellenic Republic (OJ 1982 L 388, p. 1) and by the Convention of 26 May 1989 on the Accession of the Kingdom of Spain and the Portuguese Republic (OJ 1989 L 285, p. 1),THE COURT (Fifth Chamber),,
after considering the written observations submitted on behalf of:
having regard to the Report for the Hearing,
after hearing the oral observations of Ms Pugliese and the Commission at the hearing on 13 June 2002,
after hearing the Opinion of the Advocate General at the sitting on 19 September 2002,
gives the following
On those grounds,
THE COURT (Fifth Chamber),
in answer to the questions referred to it by the Landesarbeitsgericht München by order of 11 February 2000, hereby rules:
Edward |
La Pergola |
Jann |
von Bahr |
Rosas |
|
R. Grass |
M. Wathelet |
Registrar |
President of the Fifth Chamber |