CELEX: E2011J0013
Language: en
Date: 2012-04-25 00:00:00
Title: Judgment of the Court of 25 April 2012 in Case E-13/11 — Granville Establishment v Volker Anhalt, Melanie Anhalt and Jasmin Barbaro, née Anhalt (Jurisdiction agreements — Freedom to provide and receive services — Discrimination on grounds of nationality — Justification — Remedies for non-conformity with EEA law)

29.11.2012   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 369/12
            
         JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
   of 25 April 2012
   in Case E-13/11
   Granville Establishment v Volker Anhalt, Melanie Anhalt and Jasmin Barbaro, née Anhalt
   (Jurisdiction agreements — Freedom to provide and receive services — Discrimination on grounds of nationality — Justification — Remedies for non-conformity with EEA law)
   2012/C 369/10
   In Case E-13/11 Granville Establishment v Volker Anhalt, Melanie Anhalt and Jasmin Barbaro, née Anhalt — REQUEST to the Court under Article 34 of the Agreement between the EFTA States on the Establishment of a Surveillance Authority and a Court of Justice by Fürstliches Landgericht (Princely Court of Justice), Liechtenstein, concerning the interpretation of Articles 4 and 36 of the EEA Agreement with regard to the Liechtenstein Jurisdiction Act, the Court, composed of Carl Baudenbacher, President, Per Christiansen and Páll Hreinsson (Judge-Rapporteur), Judges, gave judgment on 25 April 2012, the operative part of which is as follows:
   
               —
            
            
               Article 36 EEA precludes a provision of domestic law, such as Section 53a(1) of the Jurisdiction Act, which accords only nationals the right not to be sued abroad on the basis of a jurisdiction agreement unless that jurisdiction agreement has been publicly recorded.
            
         
               —
            
            
               It is for the national court, as far as possible, to interpret and apply the relevant provisions of national law in such a way that it is possible duly to remedy the consequences of the breach of EEA law. In that context, it is for the national court to determine whether the provisions of the Jurisdiction Act or any other national provisions can be applied for the purposes of an interpretation in conformity with EEA law.