Custom Made Commercial Ltd contra Stawa Metallbau GmbH.

• Jurisdiction: European Union
• Celex Number: 61992CJ0288
• ECLI: ECLI:EU:C:1994:268
• Docket Number: C-288/92
• Court: Court of Justice (European Union)
• Procedure Type: Reference for a preliminary ruling
• Date: 29 June 1994

Avis juridique important

|

61992J0288

Judgment of the Court of 29 June 1994. - Custom Made Commercial Ltd v Stawa Metallbau GmbH. - Reference for a preliminary ruling: Bundesgerichtshof - Germany. - Brussels Convention - Place of performance of an obligation - Uniform law of sale. - Case C-288/92.

European Court reports 1994 Page I-02913
Swedish special edition Page I-00261
Finnish special edition Page I-00301

Summary
Parties
Grounds
Decision on costs
Operative part

Keywords

++++

Convention on Jurisdiction and the Enforcement of Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters ° Special jurisdiction ° Court of the place of performance of a contractual obligation ° Determination of the place of performance according to the substantive law, including, if appropriate, the uniform law on international sales, applicable according to the conflicts rules of the court seised

(Convention of 27 September 1968, Art. 5(1), as amended by the Accession Convention of 1978)

Summary

The place of performance of the obligation in question was chosen as the criterion of jurisdiction in Article 5(1) of the Convention on Jurisdiction and the Enforcement of Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters because, being precise and clear, it fits into the general aim of the Convention, which is to establish rules guaranteeing certainty as to the allocation of jurisdiction among the various national courts before which proceedings in matters relating to a contract may be brought. That criterion makes it possible for a defendant to be sued in the courts for the place of performance of the obligation in question, even where the court thus designated is not that which has the closest connection with the dispute.

The court before which the matter is brought must determine in accordance with its own rules of conflicts of laws, including, if appropriate, a uniform law, what is the law applicable to the legal relationship in question and define, in accordance with that law, the place of performance of the contractual obligation in question. Article 5(1) of the Convention, as amended by the Convention on the Accession of the Kingdom of Denmark, Ireland and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, must be interpreted as meaning that, in the case of a demand for payment made by a supplier to his customer under a contract of manufacture and supply, the place of performance of the obligation to pay the price is to be determined pursuant to the substantive law governing the obligation in dispute under the conflicts rules of the court seised, even where those rules refer to the application to the contract of provisions such as those of the Uniform Law on the International Sale of Goods, annexed to the Hague Convention of 1 July 1964.

Parties

In Case C-288/92,

REFERENCE to the Court under the Protocol of 3 June 1971 on the interpretation by the Court of Justice of the Convention of 27 September 1968 on Jurisdiction and the Enforcement of Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters by the Bundesgerichtshof (Federal Court of Justice) (Germany) for a preliminary ruling in the proceedings pending before that court between

Custom Made Commercial Ltd

and

Stawa Metallbau GmbH

on the interpretation of Article 5(1) and the first paragraph of Article 17 of the Convention of 27 September 1968 on Jurisdiction and the Enforcement of Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters (OJ 1978 L 304, p. 36), as amended by the Convention of 9 October 1978 on the Accession of the Kingdom of Denmark, Ireland and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (OJ 1978 L 304, p. 1 and ° amended version ° p. 77),

THE COURT,

composed of: O. Due, President, J.C. Moitinho de Almeida and M. Diez de Velasco (Presidents of Chambers), C.N. Kakouris (Rapporteur), F.A. Schockweiler, F. Grévisse, M. Zuleeg, P.J.G. Kapteyn and J.L. Murray, Judges,

Advocate General: C.O. Lenz,

Registrar: H. von Holstein, Deputy Registrar,

after considering the written observations submitted on behalf of:

° the German Government, by Professor Christof Boehmer, Ministerialrat at the Federal Ministry of Justice, acting as Agent,

° the Italian Government, by Professor L. Ferrari Bravo, Head of the Legal Department of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, acting as Agent, assisted by O. Fiumara, Avvocato dello Stato,

° the Commission of the European Communities, by P. van Nuffel, of the Legal Service, acting as Agent, assisted by Wolf-Dietrich Krause-Ablass, Rechtsanwalt, Duesseldorf,

having regard to the Report for the Hearing,

after hearing the oral observations of the Italian Government and the Commission of the European Communities at the hearing on...