CELEX: C2002/097/02
Language: en
Date: 2002-04-20 00:00:00
Title: Order of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 22 January 2002 in Case C-447/00 (Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Landesgericht Salzburg): Holto Ltd (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Registration of a company branch established in a Member State in the commercial register of that State, the company having its seat in another Member State where it conducts no economic activities — Lack of jurisdiction of the Court)

20.4.2002               EN                      Official Journal of the European Communities                                                  C 97/1
                                                                         I
                                                                   (Information)
                                                     COURT OF JUSTICE
                                                               COURT OF JUSTICE
                 JUDGMENT OF THE COURT                                             and their Member States, of the one part, and the Republic of
                                                                                   Poland, of the other part, concluded and approved on behalf of
                         29 January 2002                                           the Community by Decision 93/743/Euratom, ECSC, EC of
                                                                                   the Council and the Commission of 13 December 1993, which
in Case C-162/00 (Reference for a preliminary ruling from                          has direct effect, precludes the application to Polish nationals of
the Bundesarbeitsgericht): Land Nordrhein-Westfalen v                              a national provision according to which positions for foreign-
                 Beata Pokrzeptowicz-Meyer (1)                                     language assistants may be filled by means of fixed-term
                                                                                   contracts of employment, whereas, for other teaching staff
(External relations — Europe Agreement between the Com-                            performing special duties, recourse to such contracts must be
munities and Poland — Interpretation of the first indent of                        individually justified by an objective reason.
Article 37(1) — Prohibition of discrimination based on
nationality as regards conditions of employment or dismissal                 2.    The first indent of Article 37(1) of the Europe Agreement
for Polish workers legally employed in a Member State —                            applies, from the date of entry into force of that agreement, to
Fixed-term contract of employment of a foreign-language                            a fixed-term contract of employment which was concluded prior
assistant — Effect on such a contract of the entry into force                      to the date of its entry into force but which is due to expire after
                    of the Europe Agreement)                                       that date.
                          (2002/C 97/01)                                     (1) OJ C 211 of 22.7.2000.
                   (Language of the case: German)
(Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be published
                   in the European Court Reports)                                                  ORDER OF THE COURT
                                                                                                         (Fifth Chamber)
In Case C-162/00: Reference to the Court under Article 234
EC by the Bundesarbeitsgericht (Germany) for a preliminary                                             of 22 January 2002
ruling in the proceedings pending before that court between                  in Case C-447/00 (Reference for a preliminary ruling from
Land Nordrhein-Westfalen and Beata Pokrzeptowicz-Meyer,                                 the Landesgericht Salzburg): Holto Ltd (1)
on the interpretation of Article 37(1) of the Europe Agreement
establishing an association between the European Communi-                    (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Registration of a
ties and their Member States, of the one part, and the Republic              company branch established in a Member State in the
of Poland, of the other part, concluded and approved on behalf               commercial register of that State, the company having its
of the Community by Decision 93/743/Euratom, ECSC, EC of                     seat in another Member State where it conducts no economic
the Council and the Commission of 13 December 1993                                    activities — Lack of jurisdiction of the Court)
(OJ 1993 L 348, p. 1), the Court, composed of: G.C. Rodrı́guez
Iglesias, President, P. Jann, F. Macken, N. Colneric and S. von                                           (2002/C 97/02)
Bahr (Presidents of Chambers), C. Gulmann, D.A.O. Edward,
A. La Pergola (Rapporteur), J.-P. Puissochet, J.N. Cunha Rodri-                                  (Language of the case: German)
gues and C.W.A. Timmermans, Judges; F.G. Jacobs, Advocate                    (Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be published
General; L. Hewlett, Administrator, Registrar, has given a                                        in the European Court Reports)
judgment on 29 January 2002, in which it has ruled:
1.    The first indent of Article 37(1) of the Europe Agreement              In Case C-447/00: Reference to the Court under Article 234 EC
      establishing an association between the European Communities           by the Landesgericht Salzburg (Austria) for a preliminary
 ---pagebreak--- C 97/2                  EN                       Official Journal of the European Communities                                        20.4.2002
ruling concerning the application for registration in the                   Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Tribunal de
Commercial Register made to that court by Holto Ltd. — on                   Commerce de Marseille by order of 22 January 2002 in
the interpretation of Articles 43 EC and 48 EC — the                        the case of Marseille Fret S.A. against Seatrano Shipping
Court (Fifth Chamber), composed of P. Jann, President of                                             Company Limited
the Chamber, D.A.O. Edward, A. La Pergola, M. Wathelet
(Rapporteur) and C.W.A. Timmermans, Judges; S. Alber,
Advocate General; Registrar: R. Grass, has made an order on                                            (Case C-24/02)
22 January 2002 in which it has ordered:
The Court of Justice of the European Communities clearly lacks                                         (2002/C 97/04)
jurisdiction to answer the questions put by the Landesgericht Salzburg
in its order of 27 November 2000.
(1) OJ C 28 of 27.1.2001.                                                   Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the
                                                                            European Communities by order of the Tribunal de Commerce
                                                                            de Marseille (Marseille Commercial Court) of 22 January 2002,
                                                                            received at the Court Registry on 31 January 2002, for a
                                                                            preliminary ruling in the case of Marseille Fret S.A. against
                                                                            Seatrano Shipping Company Limited on the following ques-
                                                                            tions:
Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Cour de                           1.    Does Title II of the Brussels Convention of 27 September
Cassation (Belgium) by judgement of 6 November 2001 in                            1968, as reproduced in Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 of
the case of Office National de l’Emploi against Mohamed                           22 December 2000 (1), permit a court of a Member State
                                Alami                                             to restrain a citizen of another Contracting State from
                                                                                  bringing proceedings before the courts of his home
                                                                                  country, under either his national law or Community
                           (Case C-23/02)                                         law?
                           (2002/C 97/03)                                   2.    May an English court, by way of an anti-suit injunction,
                                                                                  purport to restrain a person from having access to another
                                                                                  Community court which nevertheless have jurisdiction
                                                                                  under the Brussels Convention of 27 September 1968, as
Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the                            reproduced in Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 of 22 Decem-
European Communities by judgement of the Cour de Cassation                        ber 2000?
(National Employment Office) (Belgium) of 6 November 2001,
received at the Court Registry on 31 January 2002, for a
preliminary ruling in the case of Office National de l’Emploi               3.    May an English court, by means of that procedure deprive
(National Employment Office) against Mohamed Alami on the                         other Community courts of the power to rule on matters
following question:                                                               falling within their own competence when that power
                                                                                  appears to arise from the provisions of Chapter II of
                                                                                  Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 of 22 December 2000?
Does the Cooperation Agreement between the European
Economic Community and the Kingdom of Morocco signed
in Rabat on 27 April 1976, concluded on behalf of the                       4.    Is an order compelling a Community national to with-
Community by Council Regulation (EEC) No 2211/78 of                               draw an independent action already commenced before a
26 September 1978 (1), preclude a Member State from taking                        French court, under threat of punitive sanctions such as
account only of work periods as an employee completed on                          those provided for by the English anti-suit injunction
its territory by workers of Moroccan nationality for the                          procedure, consistent with the fundamental principle of
purposes of determining whether they are entitled to benefit                      the right to access to a court, as protected by the Court
from a supplement for seniority increasing the basic amount                       of Justice of the European Communities?
of their unemployment benefit?
(1) Council Regulation (EEC) No 2211/78 of 26 September 1978                (1) Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 of 22 December 2000 on
    concerning the conclusion of the Cooperation Agreement between              jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in
    the European Economic Community and the Kingdom of Morocco                  civil and commercial matters (OJ L 12, 16.1.2001, p. 1).
    (OJ L 264, 27.9.1978, p. 1).