Viru Maakohus; 2011-02-25; 2-10-44779
Decision by national courts in the field of European Union law — ECLI:EE:VMK:2011:2.10.44779.7521
Date: 2011-02-25
Subject matter: Judicial cooperation in civil matters;Lugano Convention
Origin: Estonia

82011EE0225(51)_ENG_SUMJURE
JURE summary
JURE summary
This case regards an action brought by an Estonian natural person (hereinafter ‘the plaintiff’) against its employer - company domiciled in Norway (hereinafter ‘the defendant’) - for alleged loss of earnings.
The action was filled with the Viru Maakohus (hereinafter ‘the Court of First Instance’), but the defendant objected, alleging the lack of jurisdiction of the Estonian courts. Since the defendant was domiciled in Norway, the Court of First Instance held that, for the purposes of jurisdiction determination, the new Lugano Convention (1) must be applied. The Court of First Instance cited Article 19, according to which ‘an employer domiciled in a State bound by this Convention may be sued (1) in the courts of the State where he is domiciled; or (2) in another State bound by this Convention: (a) in the courts for the place where the employee habitually carries out his work or in the courts for the last place where he did so; or (b) if the employee does not or did not habitually carry out his work in any one country, in the courts for the place where the business which engaged the employee is or was situated.’ It was clear that the defendant was domiciled in Norway and had neither a branch nor any establishment situated in Estonia and the plaintiff was required to carry out his work in Norway.
The Court of First Instance concluded that this case was not subject to the Estonian jurisdiction and the action was dismissed.
(1) Convention on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters.