CELEX: C2006/131/14
Language: en
Date: 2006-06-03 00:00:00
Title: Case C-3/04: Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of  16 March 2006  (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Rechtbank Utrecht) — Poseidon Chartering BV v Marianne Zeeschip VOF, Albert Mooij, Sjoerdtje Sijswerda, Gerrit Schram (Directive 86/653/EEC — Self-employed commercial agents — Meaning of commercial agent — Conclusion and extensions of a single contract over several years)

3.6.2006   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 131/8
            
         Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 16 March 2006 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Rechtbank Utrecht) — Poseidon Chartering BV v Marianne Zeeschip VOF, Albert Mooij, Sjoerdtje Sijswerda, Gerrit Schram
   (Case C-3/04) (1)
   
   (Directive 86/653/EEC - Self-employed commercial agents - Meaning of commercial agent - Conclusion and extensions of a single contract over several years)
   (2006/C 131/14)
   Language of the case: Dutch
   Referring court
   Rechtbank Utrecht
   Parties to the main proceedings
   
      Applicant(s): Poseidon Chartering BV
   
      Defendant(s): Marianne Zeeschip VOF, Albert Mooij, Sjoerdtje Sijswerda, Gerrit Schram
   Re:
   Reference for a preliminary ruling — Rechtbank Utrecht — Interpretation of Article 1(2) of Council Directive 86/653/EEC of 18 December 1986 on the coordination of the laws of the Member States relating to self-employed commercial agents (OJ 1986 L 382, p. 17) — Meaning of commercial agent — Self-employed intermediary, who has negotiated a charter for a ship-owner, and its extension from year to year, in return for a commission
   Operative part of the judgment
   Article 1(2) of Council Directive 86/653/EEC of 18 December 1986 on the coordination of the laws of the Member States relating to self-employed commercial agents is to be interpreted as meaning that, where a self-employed intermediary had authority to conclude a single contract, subsequently extended over several years, the condition laid down by that provision that the authority be continuing requires that the principal should have conferred continuing authority on that intermediary to negotiate successive extensions to that contract.
   
      (1)  OJ C 59 of 6.3.2004.