BAG; 2020-05-07; 2 AZR 692/19
Decision by national courts in the field of European Union law — ECLI:DE:BAG:2020:070520.U.2AZR692.19.0
Date: 2020-05-07
Subject matter: Judicial cooperation in civil matters
Origin: Germany

82020DE0507(51)_ENG_SUMJURE
JURE summary
JURE summary
An Indian citizen person (hereinafter ‘the plaintiff’) domiciled in India filed an action against an air carrier domiciled in Germany (hereinafter ‘the defendant’) seeking compensation.
The plaintiff worked for the defendant as a flight attendant with his occupational base in Delhi, with Delhi also being his centre of life. The employment agreement concluded between the parties had been executed in Delhi in the respective branch office of the defendant. The plaintiff flew regularly from Delhi to Frankfurt am Main or Munich and back. Citing behavioural issues, the plaintiff was suspended at first and later dismissed with immediate effect.
The plaintiff contested the dismissal by filing an action with the Arbeitsgericht Frankfurt am Main (hereinafter ‘the Court of First Instance’) stating that the dispute was subject to German law and no reason for dismissal had existed.
The Court of First Instance dismissed the action as was the case with the appeal lodged with the Hessisches Landesarbeitsgericht (hereinafter ‘the Court of Appeal’).
The plaintiff pursued his claim further by filing a revision with the Bundesarbeitsgericht (hereinafter ‘the Supreme Court’). The revision was found justified.
The international jurisdiction of German courts followed from Article 66(1) of the Brussels I Regulation (recast) (1).
The Court of Appeal was correct to conclude that the applicable law was the law of India. However, it failed to examine the respective provisions of Indian law. The Supreme Court could not decide whether the employment relations had been terminated and whether the plaintiff had been entitled to receive a preliminary employer’s reference and was to be allowed to continue working until the situation was clarified.
Based on the revision of the plaintiff, the Supreme Court annulled the decision of the Court of Appeal and referred the case back for a new hearing and decision to the Court of Appeal.
(1) Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2012 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters.