CELEX: 62021CN0567
Language: en
Date: 2021-09-15 00:00:00
Title: Case C-567/21: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Cour de cassation (France) lodged on 15 September 2021 — BNP Paribas SA v TR

22.11.2021   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 471/29
            
         
      Request for a preliminary ruling from the Cour de cassation (France) lodged on 15 September 2021 — BNP Paribas SA v TR
      (Case C-567/21)
      (2021/C 471/36)
      Language of the case: French
      
         Referring court
      
      Cour de cassation
      
         Parties to the main proceedings
      
      
         Appellant: BNP Paribas SA
      
         Respondent: TR
      
         Questions referred
      
      
                  1.
               
               
                  Must Articles 33 and 36 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 (1) be interpreted as meaning that, where the legislation of the Member State of origin of the judgment confers on that judgment authority such as to preclude a new action being brought by the same parties for determining the claims that could have been raised in the initial proceedings, the effects which that judgment has in the Member State in which enforcement is sought preclude a court of that latter State, whose legislation, as applicable ratione temporis, provided in employment law for a similar obligation of concentration of claims, from adjudicating on such claims?
               
            
                  2.
               
               
                  If the first question is answered in the negative, must Articles 33 and 36 of Council Regulation No 44/2001 be interpreted as meaning that an action such as a claim of unfair dismissal in the United Kingdom has the same cause of action and the same subject matter as an action such as a claim of dismissal without actual and serious cause in French law, so that the employee’s claims for damages for dismissal without actual and serious cause, compensation in lieu of notice, and compensation for dismissal before the French courts are inadmissible after the employee has obtained a decision in the United Kingdom declaring that there has been an unfair dismissal and making a compensatory award in that respect? Is it necessary in that regard to distinguish between, on the one hand, the damages for dismissal without actual and serious cause that might have the same cause of action and the same subject matter as the compensatory award and, on the other, the compensation for dismissal and compensation in lieu of notice which, in French law, are payable where the dismissal is based on an actual and serious cause, but are not payable in the event of dismissal based on serious misconduct?
               
            
                  3.
               
               
                  Likewise, must Articles 33 and 36 of Council Regulation No 44/2001 be interpreted as meaning that an action such as a claim of unfair dismissal in the United Kingdom and an action for payment of bonuses or allowances provided for in the contract of employment have the same cause of action and the same subject matter when those actions are based on the same contractual relationship between the parties?
               
            
         (1)  OJ 2001 L 12, p. 1.