Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 1 March 2005 in Case C- 281/02 reference for a preliminary ruling from the Court of Appeal (England and Wales) Civil Division (United Kingdom): Andrew Owusu v N.B. Jackson, trading as ‘Villa Holidays Bal-Inn Villas’ and Others (Brussels Convention — Territorial scope of the Brussels Convention — Article 2 — Jurisdiction — Accident which occurred in a non–Contracting State — Personal injury — Action brought in a Contracting State against a person domiciled in that State and other defendants domiciled in a non–Contracting State — Forum non conveniens — Incompatibility with the Brussels Convention)
Date: 2005-04-30
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: enforcement of ruling, interpretation of the law, jurisdiction, legal action, national law

C 106/2

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

30.4.2005

4. Where employees plead that the principle of equal treatment has
been infringed to their detriment and establish facts from which it
may be presumed that there has been direct or indirect discrimina-
tion, Community law, in particular Council Directive 97/80/EC
of 15 December 1997 on the burden of proof in cases of discrimi-
nation based on sex, is to be interpreted as meaning that it shall
be for the respondent to prove that there has been no breach of
that principle.

(1) OJ C 169 of 13.07.2002.

ment on 1 March 2005, the operative part of which is as
follows:

The Convention of 27 September 1968 on Jurisdiction and the Enfor-
cement of Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters, 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, by the Convention of 25 October
1982 on the Accession of the Hellenic Republic and by the Conven-
tion of 26 May 1989 on the Accession of the Kingdom of Spain and
the Portuguese Republic, precludes a court of a Contracting State from
declining the jurisdiction conferred on it by Article 2 of that conven-
tion on the ground that a court of a non-Contracting State would be
a more appropriate forum for the trial of the action even if the juris-
diction of no other Contracting State is in issue or the proceedings
have no connecting factors to any other Contracting State.

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(1) OJ C 233 of 28.09.2002.

(Grand Chamber)

of 1 March 2005

in Case C- 281/02 reference for a preliminary ruling from
the Court of Appeal (England and Wales) Civil Division
(United Kingdom): Andrew Owusu v N.B. Jackson, trading
as ‘Villa Holidays Bal-Inn Villas’ and Others (1)

(Brussels Convention — Territorial scope of the Brussels
Convention — Article 2 — Jurisdiction — Accident which
occurred in a non–Contracting State — Personal injury —
Action brought in a Contracting State against a person domi-
ciled in that State and other defendants domiciled in a non–
Contracting State — Forum non conveniens — Incompat-
ibility with the Brussels Convention)

(2005/C 106/02)

(Language of the case: English)

In Case C-281/02, Reference for a preliminary ruling under the
Protocol of 3 June 1971 on the interpretation by the Court of
Justice of the Convention of 27 September 1968 on Jurisdic-
tion and the Enforcement of Judgments in Civil and Commer-
cial Matters by the Court of Appeal (England and Wales) Civil
Division (United Kingdom), by decision of 5 July 2002,
received at the Court on 31 July 2002,
in the proceedings
Andrew Owusu v N.B. Jackson, trading as ‘Villa Holidays Bal-
Inn Villas’, Mammee Bay Resorts Ltd, Mammee Bay Club Ltd,
The Enchanted Garden Resorts & Spa Ltd, Consulting Services
Ltd, Town & Country Resorts Ltd — the Court
(Grand
Chamber), composed of P. Jann, President of the First Chamber,
acting for the President, C.W.A. Timmermans and A. Rosas,
Puissochet,
Presidents of Chambers, C. Gulmann,
R. Schintgen (Rapporteur), N. Colneric, S. von Bahr and J.N.
Cunha Rodrigues,
Judges; P. Léger, Advocate General; L.
Hewlett, Principal Administrator, for the Registrar, gave a judg-

J.-P.

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(Second Chamber)

of 3 March 2005

in Case C-283/02: Italian Republic v Commission of the
European Communities (1)

(Action for annulment — Wine production — Regulation
(EC) No 753/2002 — description, designation, presentation
and protection of the products — Protection of additional
traditional terms — Erroneous classification of traditional
terms — Languages permitted to be used on labels — Prin-
ciple of equal treatment)

(2005/C 106/03)

(Language of the case: Italian)

In Case C-283/02 Italian Republic (Agent: I.M. Braguglia and
M. Fiorilli, lawyer) v Commission of the European Communities
(Agent: A. Alves Vieira, V. Di Bucci and M. Nolin) — action for
(Second
annulment under Article 230 EC — the Court
Chamber), composed of C.W.A. Timmermans, President of the
Chamber, C. Gulmann (Rapporteur), R. Schintgen, P. Kūris and
G. Arestis, Judges; D. Ruiz-Jarabo Colomer, Advocate General;
M. Múgica Arzamendi, Principal Administrator, for the Regis-
trar, gave a judgment on 3 March 2005, in which it:

1. Dismisses the action;