BAILII is celebrating 24 years of free online access to the law! Would you consider making a contribution?
No donation is too small. If every visitor before 31 December gives just £1, it will have a significant impact on BAILII's ability to continue providing free access to the law.
Thank you very much for your support!
[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback] | ||
Court of Justice of the European Communities (including Court of First Instance Decisions) |
||
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> Court of Justice of the European Communities (including Court of First Instance Decisions) >> Ingmar GB (Free movement of persons) [2000] EUECJ C-381/98 (09 November 2000) URL: http://www.bailii.org/eu/cases/EUECJ/2000/C38198.html Cite as: EU:C:2000:605, [2000] ECR I-9305, [2001] 1 CMLR 9, ECLI:EU:C:2000:605, Case C-381/98, [2000] EUECJ C-381/98, [2001] 1 All ER (Comm) 329, [2001] All ER (EC) 57 |
[New search] [Help]
JUDGMENT OF THE COURT (Fifth Chamber)
9 November 2000 (1)
(Directive 86/653/EEC - Self-employed commercial agent carrying on his activity in a Member State - Principal established in a non-member country - Clause submitting the agency contract to the law of the country of establishment of the principal)
In Case C-381/98,
REFERENCE to the Court under Article 177 of the EC Treaty (now Article 234 EC) by the Court of Appeal of England and Wales (Civil Division), United Kingdom, for a preliminary ruling in the proceedings pending before that court between
Ingmar GB Ltd
and
Eaton Leonard Technologies Inc.
on the interpretation of Council Directive 86/653/EEC of 18 December 1986 on the coordination of the laws of the Member States relating to self-employed commercial agents (OJ 1986 L 382, p. 17),
THE COURT (Fifth Chamber),
composed of: M. Wathelet, President of the First Chamber, acting as President of the Fifth Chamber, D.A.O. Edward and P. Jann (Rapporteur), Judges,
Advocate General: P. Léger,
Registrar: L. Hewlett, Administrator,
after considering the written observations submitted on behalf of:
- Ingmar GB Ltd, by F. Randolph and R. O'Donoghue, Barristers, instructed by Fladgate Fielder, Solicitors,
- Eaton Leonard Technologies Inc., by M. Pooles, Barrister, instructed by Clifford Chance, Solicitors,
- the United Kingdom Government, by J.E. Collins, Assistant Treasury Solicitor, acting as Agent, assisted by S. Moore, Barrister,
- the German Government, by W.-D. Plessing, Ministerialrat in the Federal Ministry of Finance, and A. Dittrich, Ministerialrat in the Federal Ministry of Justice, acting as Agents,
- the Commission of the European Communities, by M. Patakia and K. Banks, of its Legal Service, acting as Agents,
having regard to the Report for the Hearing,
after hearing the oral observations of Ingmar GB Ltd, Eaton Leonard Technologies Inc., the United Kingdom Government and the Commission at the hearing on 26 January 2000,
after hearing the Opinion of the Advocate General at the sitting on 11 May 2000,
gives the following
Legal framework
Community legislation
'[M]ember States shall take the measures necessary to ensure that the commercial agent is, after termination of the agency contract, indemnified in accordance with paragraph 2 or compensated for damage in accordance with paragraph 3.
'[T]he parties may not derogate from Articles 17 and 18 to the detriment of the commercial agent before the agency contract expires.
National legislation
'2. These Regulations govern the relations between commercial agents and their principals and, subject to paragraph 3, apply in relation to the activities of commercial agents in Great Britain.
3. Regulations 3 to 22 do not apply where the parties have agreed that the agency contract is to be governed by the law of another Member State.
The main proceedings
'Under English law, effect will be given to the applicable law as chosen by the parties, unless there is a public policy reason, such as an overriding provision, for not so doing. In such circumstances, are the provisions of Council Directive 86/653/EEC, as implemented in the laws of the Member States, and in particular those provisions relating to the payment of compensation to agents on termination of their agreements with their principals, applicable when:
(a) a principal appoints an exclusive agent in the United Kingdom and the Republic of Ireland for the sale of its products therein; and
(b) in so far as sales of the products in the United Kingdom are concerned, the agent carries out its activities in the United Kingdom; and
(c) the principal is a company incorporated in a non-EU State, and in particular in the State of California, USA, and situated there; and
(d) the express applicable law of the contract between the parties is that of the State of California, USA?
The question referred for preliminary ruling
Costs
27. The costs incurred by the United Kingdom and German Governments and by the Commission, which have submitted observations to the Court, are not recoverable. Since these proceedings are, for the parties to the main proceedings, a step in the action pending before the national court, the decision on costs is a matter for that court.
On those grounds,
THE COURT (Fifth Chamber),
in answer to the question referred to it by the Court of Appeal of England and Wales (Civil Division) by order of 31 July 1998, hereby rules:
Articles 17 and 18 of Council Directive 86/653/EEC of 18 December 1986 on the coordination of the laws of the Member States relating to self-employed commercial agents, which guarantee certain rights to commercial agents after termination of agency contracts, must be applied where the commercial agent carried on his activity in a Member State although the principal is established in a non-member country and a clause of the contract stipulates that the contract is to be governed by the law of that country
Wathelet
|
Delivered in open court in Luxembourg on 9 November 2000.
R. Grass A. La Pergola
Registrar President of the Fifth Chamber
1: Language of the case: English.