CELEX: 62012CA0064
Language: en
Date: 2013-09-12 00:00:00
Title: Case C-64/12: Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 12 September 2013 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Hoge Raad der Nederlanden — Netherlands) — Anton Schlecker, trading as ‘Firma Anton Schlecker’ v Melitta Josefa Boedeker (Rome Convention on the law applicable to contractual obligations — Contract of employment — Article 6(2) — Applicable law in the absence of a choice made by the parties — Law of the country in which the employee ‘habitually carries out his work’ — Contract more closely connected with another Member State)

9.11.2013   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 325/6
            
         Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 12 September 2013 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Hoge Raad der Nederlanden — Netherlands) — Anton Schlecker, trading as ‘Firma Anton Schlecker’ v Melitta Josefa Boedeker
   (Case C-64/12) (1)
   
   (Rome Convention on the law applicable to contractual obligations - Contract of employment - Article 6(2) - Applicable law in the absence of a choice made by the parties - Law of the country in which the employee ‘habitually carries out his work’ - Contract more closely connected with another Member State)
   2013/C 325/09
   Language of the case: Dutch
   
      Referring court
   
   Hoge Raad der Nederlanden
   
      Parties to the main proceedings
   
   
      Applicant: Anton Schlecker, trading as ‘Firma Anton Schlecker’
   
      Defendant: Melitta Josefa Boedeker
   
      Re:
   
   Request for a preliminary ruling — Hoge Raad der Nederlanden — Interpretation of Article 6(2) of the Convention on the law applicable to contractual obligations, opened for signature in Rome on 19 June 1980 (OJ 1980 L 266, p. 1) — Law applicable where none chosen — Employment contract — Law of the country in which the employee habitually carries out his work — Employee who has carried out his work for a lengthy period and without interruption in a particular Member State — Employment contract which appears, in the light of all the other circumstances of the case, to be very closely connected with another Member State
   
      Operative part of the judgment
   
   Article 6(2) of the Convention on the law applicable to contractual obligations, opened for signature in Rome on 19 June 1980, must be interpreted as meaning that, even where an employee carries out the work in performance of the contract habitually, for a lengthy period and without interruption in the same country, the national court may, under the concluding part of that provision, disregard the law of the country where the work is habitually carried out, if it appears from the circumstances as a whole that the contract is more closely connected with another country.
   
      (1)  OJ C 126, 28.4.2012.