Estasis Salotti di Colzani Aimo e Gianmario Colzani s.n.c. v Rüwa Polstereimaschinen GmbH.

• Jurisdiction: European Union
• Celex Number: 61976CJ0024
• ECLI: ECLI:EU:C:1976:177
• Date: 14 December 1976
• Court: Court of Justice (European Union)
• Procedure Type: Reference for a preliminary ruling
• Docket Number: 24-76

Avis juridique important

|

61976J0024

Judgment of the Court of 14 December 1976. - Estasis Salotti di Colzani Aimo et Gianmario Colzani v Rüwa Polstereimaschinen GmbH. - Reference for a preliminary ruling: Bundesgerichtshof - Germany. - Convention of 27 September 1968 on Jurisdiction and the Enforcement of Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters, Article 17 (jurisdiction by consent). - Case 24-76.

European Court reports 1976 Page 01831
Greek special edition Page 00653
Portuguese special edition Page 00717
Spanish special edition Page 00593
Swedish special edition Page 00217
Finnish special edition Page 00227

Summary
Parties
Subject of the case
Grounds
Decision on costs
Operative part

Keywords

1 . CONVENTION OF 27 SEPTEMBER 1968 ON JURISDICTION AND THE ENFORCEMENT OF JUDGMENTS IN CIVIL AND COMMERCIAL MATTERS - JURISDICTION BY CONSENT - EFFECT - VALIDITY - MANNER IN WHICH APPLIED - STRICT INTERPRETATION - CONSENSUS BETWEEN THE PARTIES

( CONVENTION OF 27 SEPTEMBER 1968 , ARTICLE 17 )

2 . CONVENTION OF 27 SEPTEMBER 1968 - COURTS HAVING JURISDICTION - JURISDICTION BY CONSENT - IN WRITING - CONTRACT SIGNED BY THE PARTIES - GENERAL CONDITIONS OF SALE PRINTED ON THE BACK - CLAUSE CONFERRING JURISDICTION - NECESSITY FOR AN EXPRESS REFERENCE TO THOSE CONDITIONS IN THE CONTRACT

( CONVENTION OF 27 SEPTEMBER 1968 , ARTICLE 17 )

3 . CONVENTION OF 27 SEPTEMBER 1968 - COURTS HAVING JURISDICTION - JURISDICTION BY CONSENT - IN WRITING - CONTRACT - ENTERED INTO BY REFERENCE TO PRIOR OFFERS - REFERENCE TO GENERAL CONDITIONS OF SALE - CLAUSE CONFERRING JURISDICTION - NECESSITY FOR AN EXPRESS REFERENCE

( CONVENTION OF 27 SEPTEMBER 1968 , ARTICLE 17 )

Summary

1 . THE WAY IN WHICH ARTICLE 17 OF THE CONVENTION OF 27 SEPTEMBER 1968 IS TO BE APPLIED MUST BE INTERPRETED IN THE LIGHT OF THE EFFECT OF THE CONFERMENT OF JURISDICTION BY CONSENT , WHICH IS TO EXCLUDE BOTH THE JURISDICTION DETERMINED BY THE GENERAL PRINCIPLE LAID DOWN IN ARTICLE 2 AND THE SPECIAL JURISDICTIONS PROVIDED FOR IN ARTICLES 5 AND 6 OF THAT CONVENTION . IN VIEW OF THE CONSEQUENCES THAT SUCH AN OPTION MAY HAVE ON THE POSITION OF THE PARTIES TO THE ACTION , THE REQUIREMENTS SET OUT IN ARTICLE 17 GOVERNING THE VALIDITY OF CLAUSES CONFERRING JURISDICTION MUST BE STRICTLY CONSTRUED .

BY MAKING THE VALIDITY OF CLAUSES CONFERRING JURISDICTION SUBJECT TO THE EXISTENCE OF AN ' AGREEMENT ' BETWEEN THE PARTIES , ARTICLE 17 IMPOSES ON THE COURT BEFORE WHICH THE MATTER IS BROUGHT THE DUTY OF EXAMINING , FIRST , WHETHER THE CLAUSE CONFERRING JURISDICTION UPON IT WAS IN FACT THE SUBJECT OF A CONSENSUS BETWEEN THE PARTIES , WHICH MUST BE CLEARLY AND PRECISELY DEMONSTRATED , FOR THE PURPOSE OF THE FORMAL REQUIREMENTS IMPOSED BY ARTICLE 17 IS TO ENSURE THAT THE CONSENSUS BETWEEN THE PARTIES IS IN FACT ESTABLISHED .

2 . IN THE CASE OF A CLAUSE CONFERRING JURISDICTION , WHICH IS INCLUDED AMONG THE GENERAL CONDITIONS OF SALE OF ONE OF THE PARTIES , PRINTED ON THE BACK OF THE CONTRACT , THE REQUIREMENT OF A WRITING UNDER THE FIRST PARAGRAPH OF ARTICLE 17 OF THE CONVENTION OF 27 SEPTEMBER 1968 IS ONLY FULFILLED IF THE CONTRACT SIGNED BY THE TWO PARTIES INCLUDES AN EXPRESS REFERENCE TO THOSE GENERAL CONDITIONS .

3 . IN THE CASE OF A CONTRACT CONCLUDED BY REFERENCE TO...