Case C-9/12: Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 19 December 2013 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal de commerce, Verviers — Belgium) — Corman-Collins SA v La Maison du Whisky SA (Jurisdiction in civil and commercial matters — Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 — Article 2 — Article 5(1)(a) and (b) — Special jurisdiction in matters relating to contract — Concepts of ‘sale of goods’ and ‘supply of services’ — Agreement for the distribution of goods)
Date: 2013-12-19
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Belgium, EU law - national law, France, concessionaire, exclusive distribution agreement, jurisdiction, provision of services








C_2014052EN.01000602.xml










22.2.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 52/6





Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 19 December 2013 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal de commerce, Verviers — Belgium) — Corman-Collins SA v La Maison du Whisky SA
(Case C-9/12) (1)

(Jurisdiction in civil and commercial matters - Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 - Article 2 - Article 5(1)(a) and (b) - Special jurisdiction in matters relating to contract - Concepts of ‘sale of goods’ and ‘supply of services’ - Agreement for the distribution of goods)
2014/C 52/09
Language of the case: French

Referring court

Tribunal de commerce, Verviers

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Corman-Collins SA

Defendant: La Maison du Whisky SA

Re:

Request for a preliminary ruling — Tribunal de commerce de Verviers — Interpretation of Articles 2 and 5(1)(a) and (b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 of 22 December 2000 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters (OJ 2001 L 12, p. 1) — Exclusive distribution of goods agreement concluded between a grantor of the exclusive distribution rights established in France and an exclusive distributor established in Belgium — Permissibility of a national law providing for the jurisdiction of the courts of the exclusive distributor, irrespective of where the grantor of the exclusive distribution rights has its registered office.

Operative part of the judgment







1.


Article 2 of Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 of 22 December 2000 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters must be interpreted as meaning that, where the defendant is domiciled in a Member State other than that in which the court seised is situated, it precludes the application of a national rule of jurisdiction such as that provided for in Article 4 of Law of 27 July 1961 on Unilateral Termination of Exclusive Distribution Agreements of Indefinite Duration, as amended by the Law of 13 April 1971 on Unilateral termination of distribution agreements.










2.


Article 5(1)(b) of Regulation No 44/2001 must be interpreted as meaning that the rule of jurisdiction laid down in the second indent of that provision for disputes relating to contracts for the supply of services is applicable in the case of a legal action by which a plaintiff established in one Member State claims, against a defendant established in another Member State, rights arising from an exclusive distribution agreement, which requires the contract binding the parties to contain specific terms concerning the distribution by the distributor of goods sold by the grantor. It is for the national court to ascertain whether that is the case in the before it.






(1)  OJ C 73, 10.3.2012.