header-logo header-logo

26 March 2010
Issue: 7410 / Categories: Case law , Law digest
printer mail-detail

Conflict of laws

Wood Floor Solutions Andreas Domberger GmbH v Silva Trade SA C-19/09, [2010] All ER (D) 130 (Mar)

The second indent of Art 5(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) 44/2001 meant that that provision was applicable in the case where services were provided in several member states. Regarding the place of performance of the obligations arising from contracts for the provision of services, as with the sale of goods, Art 5(1)(b) of the Regulation defined that criterion of a link autonomously, in order to reinforce the objectives of unification of the rules of jurisdiction and predictability.

Accordingly, in such cases, the place of provision of services was established as the autonomous linking factor to apply to all claims founded on one and the same contract of sale. In the light of the objectives of proximity and predictability, the rule in Art 5(1)(b) was also applicable where there were several places of provision of services within a single member state, since one court had to have jurisdiction to hear all the claims arising out of the contract.

Where the

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Ogier—Martin Livingston

Ogier—Martin Livingston

Martin Livingston joins Ogier in Cayman to strengthen regulatory support

Blake Morgan—47 promotions

Blake Morgan—47 promotions

Blake Morgan announces 47 summer promotions across UK offices

NEWS
Consultant-led law firms should prepare for closer regulatory attention as oversight evolves
Artificial intelligence may draft workplace grievances, but employers cannot treat them any differently from conventional complaints
From dishonest claimants to judicial promotions and procedural skirmishes, the latest legal developments offer plenty for litigators to digest
Fresh guidance is set to influence how courts decide whether hearings take place online or in person
County Court judges remain divided over whether landlords can lawfully force entry to carry out essential safety inspections after tenants ignore access injunctions
back-to-top-scroll