International Employment Law Issues, Wage and Hour Claims and the Differentiation of Employees and Independent Contractors
|
|
- Thomasine Rice
- 6 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 International Employment Law Issues, Wage and Hour Claims and the Differentiation of Employees and Independent Contractors Germany Anke Kuhn CMS Hasche Sigle Krankhaus 1, Im Zollhafen Köln Tel: Fax:
2 Outline A. Jurisdiction in international employment disputes... 3 I. The principle of free choice of law Limitations to the principle of free choice of law... 3 a) Indispensable Regulations... 3 b) Ordre Public... 3 c) Conflicting European agreements... 4 d) Conflicting international agreements Exclusion of a renvoi... 4 II. Determination of the applicable law (in the absence of a chosen law) Applicable law Litigation in disputes occurring in several jurisdictions... 5 III. Place of jurisdiction in international disputes Exclusive jurisdiction clauses... 6 a) Limitations... 7 b) Non-Member States Refusal of recognition... 7 B. Wage and hour claims... 8 I. Wage and hour class actions in Germany... 8 II. Collective claims by works councils... 8 C. Independent contractor vs. employee I. Determination of employees and independent contractors Self-determination Incorporation of an employee Individual rights Intermediate categories... 12
3 A. Jurisdiction in International Employment Disputes I. The Principle of Freedom of Choice of Law In Germany, as in all Member States of the European Union except Denmark, the general principle of freedom of choice prevails, according to Articles 3 and 8 of Regulation (EC) No. 593/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 June 2008 on the law applicable to contractual obligations ("the Rome I Regulation"). The freedom of choice of law has the upmost priority when determining the applicable law and hence, if such a choice of law has been made, it must be considered to take precedence. 1. Limitations to the Principle of Freedom of Choice of Law The principle of freedom of choice does not exist without limitations. Even if the parties have explicitly chosen a specific law, there are numerous regulations that limit the applicability of the chosen law to protect the employee, as the weaker contractual party. a) Indispensable Regulations According to Article 8(1) of the Rome I Regulation, the choice of law may not have the result of depriving the employee of the protection afforded to him by provisions that cannot be derogated from by agreement under the law that, in the absence of choice, would have been applicable pursuant to paragraphs 2, 3 and 4 of Article 8 of the Rome I Regulation. The applicable law pursuant to Article 8(2), (3) and (4) of the Rome I Regulation is the law of the country from which the employee habitually carries out his work (paragraph 2), the law of the country where the place of business through which the employee was engaged is situated (paragraph 3) or, where it appears from the circumstances as a whole that the contract is more closely connected with a country other than that indicated in paragraphs 2 or 3, the law of that other country (paragraph 4). It must be considered that Article 8(2) of the Rome I Regulation is has priority over paragraph 3 and that paragraph 4 is always applicable and serves as a corrective. b) Ordre Public Another exception is provided for in Article 21 of the Rome I Regulation and relates to public policy (ordre public). The application of the law of any country specified by this Regulation
4 may be refused only if it is clearly incompatible with the ordre public of the forum. Ordre public is defined by the European Court of Justice as "all national provisions whose adherence is crucial for the protection of the political, social or economical organization of the concerned Member State to such an extent that the observance is stipulated for all individuals who are situated in the national territory of this State and for every legal relationship localized in this State" (ECJ C-369/96 Arblade and Leloup [1999] ECR I-8430, 8453 No. 30 = EuZW 2000, 88). c) Conflicting European Agreements If there are conflicting European agreements that regulate the same legal aspects as the Rome I Regulation, these agreements take precedence. The only exception to this is Article 7 of the Rome I Regulation, which contains specific provisions for insurance contracts. d) Conflicting International Conventions Disputes may not be regulated by the Rome I Regulation if there is an international convention (concluded before the Rome I Regulation was accepted on June 17, 2008) that deals with competing conflict-of-laws rules. In this case, the rules of the international convention have priority. Article 25 of the Rome I Regulation states that all international conventions continue to exist and have priority with only one exception: if the convention is concluded exclusively between two or more Member States and deals with issues that are regulated by the provisions of the Rome I Regulation. In such case, the Rome I Regulation takes precedence. 2. Exclusion of Renvoi If according to the provisions of the Rome I Regulation the law of a European Union or non-european Union country is applicable, renvoi is excluded under Article 20 of the Rome I Regulation. The law of that country is the applicable law. Hence, if a Member State declares, for example, California law applicable, there will be no further consideration of the rules of private international law in California.
5 Within and among the Member States, these provisions have no practical relevance, because the Member States all follow the same regulations when determining applicable law. Accordingly, renvoi is excluded from the outset. II. Determination of Applicable Law (in the Absence of a Choice of Law) Article 8 of the Rome I Regulation states exactly how to determine applicable law where the contracting parties neglected to make a choice of law. Articles 18 to 21 deal with "individual contracts of employment" and are highly protective of employees. Where both parties are domiciled (or deemed to be domiciled under Article 18) within the European Union, the effect of this regime is clear. The employee may be sued only in his home courts, but may file a claim at the court where his employer is located or where the employee has actually worked. If the employee has worked in several Member States, he may file a claim at the court where the establishment is or was located when the employee was employed. These entitlements cannot be taken away by agreement in advance. The situation is more complex, however, where non-member States are involved. 1. Applicable Law Generally, the choice of law is the primary principle determining applicable law. The parties are also able to agree on an exclusive jurisdiction clause. But these possibilities do not rule out the possibility of the countries to allow litigation to occur in their country. As stated previously, the choice of law is limited by various provisions. Moreover, the exclusive jurisdiction clause may not be valid, or the court could have jurisdiction if the defendant neglects to object to its jurisdiction. Therefore, there are various constellations in which litigation can occur in a country other than the one the parties initially agreed upon (see above). 2. Litigation in Disputes Occurring in Several Jurisdictions In cases where the factual or legal questions underlying the dispute occur in several jurisdictions, the residency of the defendant generally determines the place of jurisdiction.
6 If the employer is the defendant, the employee may also sue the employer in the Member State (other than the Member State where he resides) where the employee carries out or has carried out his work or, if the employee has worked in several Member States, the place where the establishment is or was located when the employee was employed. Therefore, in this scenario, the jurisdiction would be determined by the establishment where the employee was employed no matter where the employer resides or the employee actually worked. III. Place of Jurisdiction in International Disputes In Germany like in Europe Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 of 22 December 2000 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters (the "Judgments Regulation") is the applicable law regulating the allocation of jurisdiction between the courts of different Member States of the European Union. Where the question concerns the allocation of jurisdiction between a Member State and Iceland, Norway or Switzerland, the Lugano Convention which is similar to the Judgments Regulation applies. In general, the Judgments Regulation stipulates that litigation should take place at the courts of the Member State in which the defendant resides. For individual employment relationships, Articles 19 and 20 of the Judgments Regulation contain specific provisions that come to the same conclusion. Both employee and employer may be sued in the Member State in which they reside the employer also in the Member State (other than the Member State where he is domiciled) where the employee carries out or has carried out his work or, if the employee has worked in several Member States, the place where the establishment where the employee was employed is or was located. But there are various exceptions, such as exclusive jurisdiction agreements described in Article 23 of the Judgments Regulation. 1. Exclusive Jurisdiction Clauses The European lawmakers have established the requirements for a valid exclusive jurisdiction clause determining that the courts of a Member State have jurisdiction in Article 23 of the Judgments Regulation. These requirements are: (1) the domicile of at least one of the parties
7 must be located in a Member State, (2) the clause must be sufficiently precise in regard to the legal relationship and the court, (3) the exclusive jurisdiction clause must meet the specific formal requirements and (4) the exclusive jurisdiction clause may not aim to render inoperative exclusive jurisdiction by virtue of Article 22 of the Judgment Regulation. In international employment disputes, the exclusive jurisdiction clause may also not interfere with Article 21 of the Judgment Regulation. a) Limitations Article 21 of the Judgment Regulation limits the possibility of exclusive jurisdiction clauses in international employment disputes to those concluded after the dispute has arisen or to those allowing the employee to bring proceedings in courts other than those having jurisdiction by law. Hence, if all requirements are met and Article 21 of the Judgment Regulation has been complied with, Germany (and all of the other European Member States) recognizes exclusive jurisdiction clauses. According to Article 23(5) of the Judgments Regulation, a valid exclusive jurisdiction clause establishes the exclusive jurisdiction of the chosen court as long as the parties have not agreed otherwise. b) Non-Member States The Judgment Regulation does not expressly provide for an exclusive jurisdiction clause in favor of the courts of a non-member State, but the European Court of Justice has ruled that Article 23 "does not apply to clauses designating a court in a third country. A court situated in a Contracting State must, if it is seised notwithstanding such a jurisdiction clause, assess the validity of the clause according to the applicable law, including conflict of laws rules, where it sits" (Case C-397/98 Coreck Maritime GmbH v Handelsveem BV [2000] ECR I (a case on Article 17 of the Brussels Convention). 2. Refusal of Recognition The German labor courts may refuse to recognize the jurisdiction chosen by means of an exclusive jurisdiction clause if the requirements mentioned above have not been met or Article 21 or Article 23(5) of the Judgment Regulation were not complied with or if the defendant has participated in the proceedings of a litigation at a court not having jurisdiction (Article 24 of the Judgment Regulation), unless the defendant has only done so to contest the
8 jurisdiction of that court or where another court has exclusive jurisdiction by virtue of Article 22. B. Wage and Hour Claims I. Wage and Hour Class Actions in Germany Class actions are primarily known in the United States and are not allowed under German law. Hence, wage and hour class actions are not possible in Germany. In Germany, collective claims are possible only by way of joinder of parties, which is not comparable to class actions. A joinder of parties makes it possible for various cases to be litigated collectively and also for evidence to be heard collectively, but each individual is the holder of his or her rights even after commencement of proceedings. An admissible joinder of parties essentially requires a homogeneous factual and legal matter. However, some German laws have been enacted, for example, the "Act on Model Case Proceedings in Disputes under Capital Markets Law" (Kapitalanleger- Musterverfahrensgesetz KapMuG), allowing sample proceedings to be brought before the courts in litigation arising from mass capital markets transactions. However, this law does not make class actions as known in the United States possible and is not applicable to other civil law proceedings. Specific organizations in Germany may also sue on behalf of the public where environmental and nature protection laws have been violated and to protect consumers. This is also not comparable to class actions as known in the United States, however. II. Collective Claims by Works Councils In Germany, lawsuits dealing with wage and hour disputes must primarily be brought forward by individual employees. There are no possibilities for combining actions in these matters with other cases as done in class actions in the United States.
9 Wage and hour disputes in companies having works councils may lead to the right of codetermination, however. In Germany, works councils have co-determination rights under Section 87 of the Works Constitution Act (Betriebsverfassungsgesetz BetrVG) when employers make decisions relating to working time and collective arrangements concerning wages and bonuses. However, there is no right of co-determination with regard to individual wage issues, because these are usually regulated by individual work contracts. Works councils can file for injunctive relief in co-determination matters against employers and assert this claim by means of an injunction without being limited to the establishmentlevel arbitration committee. The German Federal Labor Court decided that works councils have a general right to file for injunctive relief against employers when co-determination matters are concerned, because works councils must act to protect the employees. The works councils must be able to provide employees with the necessary protection to prevent employers from implementing unilateral regulations by way of their managerial authority and imposing agreements on employees when they are not able to assert their rights and interests as they should be. In such cases, works councils are allowed to file for injunctive relief. But a petition for injunctive relief will be successful only if the result of the weighing of interests is not in favor of the employer. If the employer's interests prevail, the petition for injunctive relief will not be successful. The right of a works council to injunctive relief was confirmed, and its petition was successful in a case where the employer temporarily increased the usual working hours in the company (by making Saturday a working day) without involving the works council. On the other hand, injunctive relief was denied in a case where the employer ordered employees to work overtime at short notice because the employer's interests prevailed. Other cases in which works councils might be able to file successfully for injunctive relief are: equal pay for temporary workers, exceeding maximum working hours and excessive overtime. However, the weighing of interests is always an issue to be considered, and in every single case the employer's interests might prevail.
10 C. Independent Contractor vs. Employee I. Distinction Between Employees and Independent Contractors In Germany, there is no exact definition of the term employee, but there are different criteria established by the Federal Labor Court that help determine whether an individual is to be seen as an employee or an independent contractor. According to the Federal Labor Court, an employee (as opposed to an independent contractor) is an individual who serves someone else due to a private law agreement and who is obligated to perform work in personal dependence who must follow instructions given by the employer and is heteronomous (Federal Labor Court, ruling of 22 March 1995 AP ArbGG No. 21; 16 February 2000 AP ArbGG No. 70). This rule is consistent within all courts and throughout all jurisdictions in Germany. But the courts determine the status for every case individually. The personal dependence and the heteronomous performance of work, in particular, are aspects that help distinguish employees from independent contractors. If the revenue agency has determined the status of an individual, this has no binding effect on a later court decision, but labor courts may take the decision of the revenue agency into account when deciding on the status. 1. Self-Determination Generally speaking, individuals are not able to determine by contract whether someone is to be seen as an independent contractor or an employee. German labor law is based on the principle that the weaker contractual party in this case the employee must be protected. Hence, the parties to a contract have no power to determine the status of an individual. Otherwise, employers in Germany would hire individuals only as independent contractors to avoid having to pay social security contributions and to circumvent employment protection laws. Therefore, only the true and actual circumstances may indicate whether an individual is an employee or an independent contractor, and it is the courts' responsibility to interpret the
11 circumstances correctly and to compare them with the criteria that determine the status of the individual. 2. Incorporation of an Employee Questions may arise when an individual decides to incorporate. For freelancers, this has no effect on their legal status and is part of their free decision as independent contractors, but there are restrictions for employees. Employees may incorporate only if their employers have given their consent. Employees must work exclusively for their employers unless their employers have allowed them to work for other clients. If an employee decides to become an independent contractor without his employer's consent, the employer may terminate the employment contract. If the employer has agreed to the incorporation, the employee can lose his or her employee status and become an independent work contractor. The actual circumstances decide whether an individual is an employee or an independent work contractor. The employee could thus lose all of his or her social benefits and may not rely on employment protection laws. In general, however, incorporating does not change the status of an employee per se. If an employee has decided to work for his employer as a limited liability company (Gesellschaft mit beschränkter Haftung GmbH), for example, he may do so. But if the actual circumstances remain the same, the individual could be deemed to have a disguised employment status. In this case, the individual is still an employee for social security authorities, and the employer risks having to pay the social security contributions for past years. 3. Individual Rights Independent contractors are not able to claim protection under specific employment protection regulations such as the Act on Protection Against Unfair Dismissal these are applicable only if the individual has the status of an employee. The individual is an employee if the criteria mentioned above are fulfilled. If the individual fulfills the criteria and is to be considered an employee, all employment protection laws are applicable, and notice of termination may be given only if permissible under these laws. Otherwise, the individual may file a wrongful
12 dismissal claim. The court will then bindingly determine that the individual is an employee and that the dismissal was wrongful. In such case, the employee must be employed unless the employer is able to dismiss the employee under employment protection law regulations or both parties agree on a settlement or conclude a termination agreement. 4. Intermediate Categories German law does not differentiate only between employees and independent contractors. There are also individuals similar to employees (employee-like individuals). They are not employees because they are not personally dependent, but they are economically dependent and socially in need of protection to an extent comparable to employees. Examples of these are individuals working at home (such as telework or work in production). Freelancers and commercial agents who work for only one company and do not earn more than 1000 per month may be individuals similar to employees as well. In all of these cases, the labor courts have jurisdiction, and the individuals are treated as employees with regard to various employment issues if the specific regulations expressly include employee-like individuals. Some regulations may also be applicable mutatis mutandis, depending on the circumstances and the requirements of the specific regulation.
Committee on Petitions NOTICE TO MEMBERS
European Parliament 2014-2019 Committee on Petitions 27.1.2016 NOTICE TO MEMBERS Subject: Petition No 0945/2014 by Eugenia Ion (Romanian) concerning alleged failure of the Romanian courts to enforce EU
More informationBrexit Paper 4: Civil Jurisdiction and the Enforcement of Judgments
1 Brexit Paper 4: Civil Jurisdiction and the Enforcement of Judgments Summary The ability to enforce judgments of the courts from one state in another is of vital importance for the functioning of society
More informationTHE REVISED LUGANO CONVENTION: Consumer Contracts, Place of Jurisdiction and Applicable Law in Italy
THE REVISED LUGANO CONVENTION: Consumer Contracts, Place of Jurisdiction and Applicable Law in Italy Eurojuris IBG Event September 6, 2013 Basel, Switzerland Lorenzo Bacciardi, LL.M. Chairman of the Eurojuris
More informationJUDGMENT OF THE COURT (Grand Chamber) 15 March 2011 (*)
JUDGMENT OF THE COURT (Grand Chamber) 15 March 2011 (*) (Rome Convention on the law applicable to contractual obligations Contract of employment Choice made by the parties Mandatory rules of the law applicable
More informationRegulation (No) 44/2001 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters
Regulation (No) 44/2001 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters Ph D Judge Diana Ungureanu, NIM Trainer Bucharest, 14-15 November 2013 1 Introduction.
More informationInternational Litigation News
International Litigation News Newsletter of the International Bar Association Legal Practice Division MAY 2014 IN THIS ISSUE From the Co-Chairs 4 Editors note 5 Committee Officers 5 Meet the Officers 6
More informationREGULATION (EC) No 593/2008 OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL. of 17 June on the law applicable to contractual obligations (Rome I)
REGULATION (EC) No 593/2008 OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL of 17 June 2008 on the law applicable to contractual obligations (Rome I) THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN
More informationEnglish jurisdiction clauses should commercial parties change their approach?
Brexit legal consequences for commercial parties English jurisdiction clauses should commercial parties change their approach? February 2016 Issue in focus In our first Specialist paper on the legal consequences
More informationEUROPEAN UNION. Brussels, 31 March 2008 (OR. en) 2005/0261 (COD) PE-CONS 3691/07 JUSTCIV 334 CODEC 1401
EUROPEAN UNION THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMT THE COUNCIL Brussels, 31 March 2008 (OR. en) 2005/0261 (COD) PE-CONS 3691/07 JUSTCIV 334 CODEC 1401 LEGISLATIVE ACTS AND OTHER INSTRUMTS Subject: Regulation of the
More informationMANDATORY RULES and PUBLIC POLICY
1 This project is co-financed by the European Union MANDATORY RULES and PUBLIC POLICY Mandatory rules: rules that cannot be derogated from by an agreement. The parties of a contract must observe them.
More informationCONSULTATION ON COLLECTIVE REDRESS GREEK MINISTRY OF JUSTICE
CONSULTATION ON COLLECTIVE REDRESS GREEK MINISTRY OF JUSTICE Q 1 What added value would the introduction of new mechanisms of collective redress (injunctive and/or compensatory) have for the enforcement
More informationReports of Cases. JUDGMENT OF THE COURT (Second Chamber) 7 July 2016 *
Reports of Cases JUDGMENT OF THE COURT (Second Chamber) 7 July 2016 * (Reference for a preliminary ruling Jurisdiction clause Judicial cooperation in civil matters Jurisdiction and the enforcement of judgments
More informationCross Border Contracts and Dispute Settlement
Cross Border Contracts and Dispute Settlement Professor Dr. Dr. h.c. mult. Helmut Rüßmann Former Judge at the Saarland Court of Appeals Cross Border Contract of Sale Buyer France Claim for Payment Germany
More informationValencia / Spain October 28 November 1, 2015 PRIVATE INTERNATIONAL LAW. Saturday, October 31, 2015 FORUM SELECTION CLAUSES IN INTERNATIONAL CONTRACTS
59 th UIA CONGRESS Valencia / Spain October 28 November 1, 2015 PRIVATE INTERNATIONAL LAW Saturday, October 31, 2015 FORUM SELECTION CLAUSES IN INTERNATIONAL CONTRACTS VALIDITY REQUIREMENTS OF JURISDICTION
More informationEUROPEAN UNION. Brussels, 22 June 2007 (OR. en) 2003/0168 (COD) C6-0142/2007 PE-CONS 3619/07 JUSTCIV 140 CODEC 528
EUROPEAN UNION THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMT THE COUNCIL Brussels, 22 June 2007 (OR. en) 2003/0168 (COD) C6-0142/2007 PE-CONS 3619/07 JUSTCIV 140 CODEC 528 LEGISLATIVE ACTS AND OTHER INSTRUMTS Subject: REGULATION
More informationJurisdiction and applicable law for Consumers contracts: Spain
Jurisdiction and applicable law for Consumers contracts: Spain JURISDICTION A)INTERNATIONAL PERSPECTIVE I) Lugano Convention on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and
More informationPrinciples on Conflict of Laws in Intellectual Property
Principles on Conflict of Laws in Intellectual Property Prepared by the European Max Planck Group on Conflict of Laws in Intellectual Property (CLIP) Final Text 1 December 2011 CLIP Principles PREAMBLE...
More informationThe Brussels I Recast - some thoughts
The Brussels I Recast - some thoughts Nicholas Pointon, Barrister, St John s Chambers Published on 11 June 2014 Introduction 1. Those who practise in this area will be very familiar with the existing Brussels
More informationJURISDICTION AND CHOICE OF LAW IN EMPLOYMENT DISPUTES. Robert Howe QC, Mark Vinall & Tristan Jones. Contents A. INTRODUCTION... 2
JURISDICTION AND CHOICE OF LAW IN EMPLOYMENT DISPUTES Robert Howe QC, Mark Vinall & Tristan Jones Contents A. INTRODUCTION... 2 B. CHOICE OF LAW... 3 1) THE ROME CONVENTION AND THE ROME I REGULATION...
More informationTORTS IN CYBERSPACE: THE IMPACT OF THE NEW REGULATION ROME II MICHAEL BOGDAN *
M. Bogdan: Torts in Cyberspace TORTS IN CYBERSPACE: THE IMPACT OF THE NEW REGULATION ROME II by MICHAEL BOGDAN * The conflict-of-laws rules in the new EC Regulation on the Law Applicable to Non- Contractual
More informationOut-of-court dispute settlement systems for e-commerce
1 Out-of-court dispute settlement systems for e-commerce Report on legal issues Part II: The Protection of the Recipient 29 th May 2000 2 Title: Out-of-court dispute settlement systems for e- commerce.
More informationReports of Cases. JUDGMENT OF THE COURT (Third Chamber) 17 October 2013 *
Reports of Cases JUDGMENT OF THE COURT (Third Chamber) 17 October 2013 * (Rome Convention on the law applicable to contractual obligations Articles 3 and 7(2) Freedom of choice of the parties Limits Mandatory
More informationCase study on Licence contract, environmental damage, unfair competition and defamation. Conflict of laws. Project
Case study on Licence contract, environmental damage, unfair competition and defamation Conflict of laws Project Using EU Civil Justice Instruments: Development of training materials and organisation of
More informationELA ARBITRATION AND ADR GROUP. Issues arising from Brussels I Recast and Rome I
ELA ARBITRATION AND ADR GROUP Issues arising from Brussels I Recast and Rome I Question 1 Arbitration and Brussels I Recast: Do we agree that that arbitration is outside Brussels I and that the Regulations
More informationINTERACTION between BRUSSELS I bis, ROME I AND ROME II
1 This project is co-financed by the European Union INTERACTION between BRUSSELS I bis, ROME I AND ROME II All three Regulations: No 593/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 June 2008
More informationSwitzerland's Federal Code on Private International Law (CPIL) 1
Switzerland's Federal Code on Private International Law (CPIL) of December 8, 987 U M B R I C H T A T T O R N E Y S A T L A W www.umbricht.com TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter : Provisions in Common Article Page
More informationChoice of Forum: Considerations from a Practitioner s Perspective
Choice of Forum: Considerations from a Practitioner s Perspective Dr Ulrich Classen Director MaCCI Law and Economics Conference on Cartel Damages in Europe: The New Framework after the Directive Session
More informationFOA netting opinion issued in relation to the FOA Netting Agreements, FOA Clearing Module and ISDA/FOA Clearing Addendum
NETTING ANALYSER LIBRARY The Futures & Options Association 2nd Floor 36-38 Botolph Lane London EC3R 8DE 4 December 2013 Dear Sirs, FOA netting opinion issued in relation to the FOA Netting Agreements,
More informationSelection Of English Governing Law, Jurisdiction Post-Brexit
Portfolio Media. Inc. 111 West 19 th Street, 5th Floor New York, NY 10011 www.law360.com Phone: +1 646 783 7100 Fax: +1 646 783 7161 customerservice@law360.com Selection Of English Governing Law, Jurisdiction
More informationThe Brussels/Lugano Lis Pendens Rule and the Italian Torpedo
The Brussels/Lugano Lis Pendens Rule and the Italian Torpedo Michael Bogdan 1 The Brussels/Lugano System... 90 2 The Rule on Lis Pendens..... 91 3 The Principle of Mutual Trust and the Italian Torpedo..
More information2018 ISDA Choice of Court and Governing Law Guide
2018 ISDA Choice of Court and Governing Law Guide International Swaps and Derivatives Association, Inc. Copyright 2018 by International Swaps and Derivatives Association, Inc. 10 E 53 rd Street 9th Floor
More informationThe Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in Italy and in Europe
Giacomo OBERTO JUDGE COURT OF TURIN SECRETARY-GENERAL OF THE INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF JUDGES (IAJ) The Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in Italy and in Europe SUMMARY: 1. Some General Remarks on Recognition
More informationEU Instruments for Cross-border Tort Disputes. Prof. Dr. Gerald Mäsch
EU Instruments for Cross-border Tort Disputes Prof. Dr. Gerald Mäsch 2 Overview I. Jurisdiction in Cross-Border Tort Law Disputes 1. Applicability of the Brussels Ibis Regulation 2. Jurisdiction under
More informationBrexit English law and the English Courts
Brexit Law your business, the EU and the way ahead Brexit English law and the English Courts Introduction June 2018 One of the key questions that commercial parties continue to raise in relation to Brexit,
More informationThe law applicable to employment contracts under the Rome I-Regulation
Marcin Czerwiński The law applicable to employment contracts under the Rome I-Regulation Introduction Conflict-of-law rules (private international law) determine which national law applies in a case with
More informationCross-Border Traffic Accidents: Jurisdiction and Applicable Law:
Cross-Border Traffic Accidents: Jurisdiction and Applicable Law: An Introduction to the Relevant Rules of Private International Law Thomas Kadner Graziano In Europe, there exist two international instruments
More informationRATIONALE AND APPLICATION OF ARTICLE 4(1)(h) OF ROME I REGULATION
RATIONALE AND APPLICATION OF ARTICLE 4(1)(h) OF ROME I REGULATION Caroline Kleine Oslo, 4 May 2018 2 (Rome I) Article 4 (1) (h) Applicable law in the absence of choice 1.Totheextentthatthelawapplicabletothecontracthasnotbeen
More informationCONVENTION ON JURISDICTION AND THE RECOGNITION AND ENFORCEMENT OF JUDGMENTS IN CIVIL AND COMMERCIAL MATTERS
CONVENTION ON JURISDICTION AND THE RECOGNITION AND ENFORCEMENT OF JUDGMENTS IN CIVIL AND COMMERCIAL MATTERS CONV/JUD/en 1 PREAMBLE THE HIGH CONTRACTING PARTIES TO THIS CONVENTION, DETERMINED to strengthen
More informationThe UK s proposals on post-brexit civil judicial co-operation common sense prevails
Brexit Law your business, the EU and the way ahead The UK s proposals on post-brexit civil judicial co-operation common sense prevails September 2017 Introduction The UK Government had a busy summer Parliamentary
More informationRESOLUTION of the Sejm of the Republic of Poland. of 13 April 2016
RESOLUTION of the Sejm of the Republic of Poland of 13 April 2016 declaring the proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Directive 96/71/EC of The European Parliament
More informationJUDGMENT OF THE COURT (Grand Chamber) 19 July 2012 (*)
JUDGMENT OF THE COURT (Grand Chamber) 19 July 2012 (*) (Judicial cooperation in civil matters Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 Jurisdiction over individual contracts of employment Contract with an embassy of
More informationOfficial Journal L 018, 21/01/1997 P
Directive 96/71/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 1996 concerning the posting of workers in the framework of the provision of services Official Journal L 018, 21/01/1997 P.
More informationRevision of the Posting of Workers Directive frequently asked questions
European Commission Fact Sheet Revision of the Posting of Workers Directive frequently asked questions Strasbourg, 8 March 2016 What is posting of workers? A "posted" worker is an employee who is sent
More informationThe Max Planck Institute Luxembourg for International, European and Regulatory Procedural Law
The Max Planck Institute Luxembourg for International, European and Regulatory Procedural Law www.mpi.lu Revised Brussels I Regulation: Scope of Application Overview Introductory Remarks Material Scope
More informationKhawar Qureshi QC EXCLUSIVE JURISDICTION CLAUSES IN COMMERCIAL CONTRACTS
kmqureshi@aol.com Khawar Qureshi QC EXCLUSIVE JURISDICTION CLAUSES IN COMMERCIAL CONTRACTS The Legal Regimes Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 ( the Recast Regulation ) Regulation (EU) No 44/2001 ( the Brussels
More informationTHE ELECTRICITY ARBITRATION ASSOCIATION
The Rules of this Association were amended with effect from the 1 st January, 1993 in the manner herein set out. This is to allow for the reference to the Association, in accordance with its Rules, of
More informationJUDGMENT OF THE COURT (First Chamber) 18 July 2007 * ACTION under Article 226 EC for failure to fulfil obligations, brought on 29 November 2004,
JUDGMENT OF THE COURT (First Chamber) 18 July 2007 * In Case C-490/04, ACTION under Article 226 EC for failure to fulfil obligations, brought on 29 November 2004, Commission of the European Communities,
More informationProposal for a REGULATION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL
EN EN EN EUROPEAN COMMISSION Brussels, 14.12.2010 COM(2010) 748 final 2010/0383 (COD) Proposal for a REGULATION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement
More informationJurisdiction and Governing Law Rules in the European Union
2016 Jurisdiction and Governing Law Rules in the European Union Contents Introduction Recast Brussels Regulation (EU 1215/2012) Rome I Regulation (EC 593/2008) Rome II Regulation (EC 864/2007) Main exceptions
More informationEC Convention on the Law Applicable to Contractual Obligations (Rome 1980) European Union
European Union Copyright 1980 European Union ii Contents Contents Title I - Scope of the Convention 2 Article 1 - Scope of the Convention 2 Article 2 - Application of law of non-contracting States 2 Title
More informationThis is an unofficial translation from
SKÅNE AND BLEKINGE COURT OF APPEAL JUDGMENT CASE No. Department 3 17 June 2010 T 1689-09 Division 32 Malmö APPELLANT Silver Lining Finance SA, 66941 [ ] Counsel: Advokat J.K Setterwalls Advokatbyrå Stockholm
More informationCORPORATE AND COMMERCIAL. Contending with Brexit Uncertainties Governing Law Clauses. by Jennifer McGuire, James Byrne
CORPORATE AND COMMERCIAL Contending with Brexit Uncertainties Governing Law Clauses by Jennifer McGuire, James Byrne Contending with Brexit Uncertainties Governing Law Clauses 23rd January 2017 by Jennifer
More information1) Freedom of choice the primary principle
The law applicable to contractual obligations (Rome I Regulation) - a summary and practical guidance on its impact on contractual obligations concluded by Cyprus companies From 17 December 2009 Regulation
More informationEmployment (Co-Determination in the Workplace) Act (1976:580)
Employment (Co-Determination in the Workplace) Act (1976:580) Amendments: up to and including SFS 2013:615 Introductory Provisions Section 1 This Act shall apply to the relationship between employer and
More information[340] COUNCIL REGULATION 44/2001/EC ( BRUSSELS II )
[340] COUNCIL REGULATION 44/2001/EC ( BRUSSELS II ) 4. Council Regulation 44/2001/EC of 22 December 2000 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters
More informationCMS Commercial Law Group Guide. Distribution and Agency Agreements
CMS Commercial Law Group Guide Distribution and Agency Agreements February 2014 Whilst many aspects of the distribution relationship will be similar when distributing within the EU there are important
More informationRegulation Concerning Succession and Forced Heirship
Regulation Concerning Succession and Forced Heirship François TREMOSA November 8th, 2012 London 1. Definition of forced heirship in France According to article 912 of the French Civil Code, the hereditary
More informationArbitration Act B.E. 2545
1 (Translation) Arbitration Act B.E. 2545 BHUMIBOL ADULYADEJ, REX., Given on the 23 rd day of April B.E. 2545 (2002) Being the 57 th Year of the Present Reign. His Majesty King Bhumibol Adulyadej is graciously
More informationHANDY CLIENT GUIDE TO JURISDICTION UNDER RECAST BRUSSELS ENGLAND AND WALES LEGAL GUIDE SECOND EDITION
HAD CLIET GUIDE TO JURISDICTIO UDER RECAST BRUSSELS REGULATIO EGLAD AD WALES LEGAL GUIDE SECOD EDITIO July 2015 HERBERT SMITH FREEHILLS 02 HAD CLIET GUIDE TO JURISDICTIO DOES THE EGLISH COURT HAVE JURISDICTIO?
More informationEnforcement The New York Convention vs the Lugano/Brussels Conventions
Enforcement The New York Convention vs the Lugano/Brussels Conventions Karin Fløistad, Simonsen Vogt Wiig page 1 Arbitration The arbitration agreement's rules on jurisdiction and choice of law will apply
More informationTHE CERTAIN ASPECTS OF MEDIATION IN CIVIL MATTERS LAW, 2012 (English translation)
159 (I) of 2012 REPUBLIC OF CYPRUS THE CERTAIN ASPECTS OF MEDIATION IN CIVIL MATTERS LAW, 2012 (English translation) Office of the Law Commissioner Nicosia, August, 2014 ΓΕΝ (Α) L.119 ISBN 978-9963-664-55-9
More information(Notices) NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS AND BODIES COUNCIL
23.12.2009 Official Journal of the European Union C 319/1 IV (Notices) NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS AND BODIES COUNCIL Convention on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments
More informationBRITAIN S BARGAINING STRENGTH REGARDING POST-BREXIT JURISDICTION ARRANGEMENTS. David Wolfson Q.C. Society of Conservative Lawyers
BRITAIN S BARGAINING STRENGTH REGARDING POST-BREXIT JURISDICTION ARRANGEMENTS David Wolfson Q.C. Society of Conservative Lawyers FOREWORD In August 2017 the UK Government proposed an agreement with the
More informationREGULATION (EU) No 650/2012 OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL
REGULATION (EU) No 650/2012 OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL of 4 July 2012 on jurisdiction, applicable law, recognition and enforcement of decisions and acceptance and enforcement of authentic
More informationSocial Media and the Protection of Privacy Jan von Hein
European Data Science Conference Luxembourg, 7-8 November 2016 Social Media and the Protection of Privacy Jan von Hein Albert-Ludwigs-Universität Freiburg Overview I. Introduction II. The Object(s) of
More informationThe Unamar case: what is the actual meaning of the decision of the ECJ?
The Unamar case: what is the actual meaning of the decision of the ECJ? Pascal HOLLANDER Hanotiau & van den Berg (Brussels) IDI Annual Conference Torino 14 June 2014 Background: Rome Convention (+ Rome
More informationGERMANY Act on Employee Inventions as last amended by Article 7 of the Act of July 31, 2009 I 2521
GERMANY Act on Employee Inventions as last amended by Article 7 of the Act of July 31, 2009 I 2521 TABLE OF CONTENTS Part I Scope of Application and Definitions of Terms Section 1 Scope of Application
More information(ROME I) ROME REGULATION ON THE APPLICABLE LAW TO CONTRACTUAL OBLIGATIONS
1 This project is co-financed by the European Union (ROME I) ROME REGULATION ON THE APPLICABLE LAW TO CONTRACTUAL OBLIGATIONS REGULATION (EC) No 593/2008 OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL of
More informationREGULATIONS. to justice. Since a number of amendments are to be made to that Regulation it should, in the interests of clarity, be recast.
REGULATIONS REGULATION (EU) No 1215/2012 OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL of 12 December 2012 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters
More informationEUROPEAN PARLIAMENT. Session document
EUROPEAN PARLIAMT 2004 Session document 2009 C6-0317/2006 2003/0168(COD) 27/09/2006 Common position COMMON POSITION adopted by the Council on 25 September 2006 with a view to the adoption of a Regulation
More informationEJTN training April Workshop 1: Contractual obligations (Eline Ulrix) Case 1
EJTN training 21-22 April 2016 Workshop 1: Contractual obligations (Eline Ulrix) Case 1 FRO-YO SA/NV is a company incorporated in Belgium which produces a new type of frozen yoghurt, offering a whole array
More informationRome I Regulation Choice of law Absence of Choice of law Slovak Case law
This project is co-financed by the European Union Rome I Regulation Choice of law Absence of Choice of law Slovak Case law Kristián Csach Faculty of law, University of Trnava Judicial academy Slovak republic
More informationBREXIT CLIENT CALL NO 2: SHOULD BREXIT AFFECT THE POPULARITY OF ENGLISH GOVERNING LAW AND JURISDICTION CLAUSES?
Brexit Law your business, the EU and the way forward BREXIT CLIENT CALL NO 2: SHOULD BREXIT AFFECT THE POPULARITY OF ENGLISH GOVERNING LAW AND JURISDICTION CLAUSES? Overview July 2016 Led by Philip Wood
More informationMaking a cross border claim in the EU
EX725 Making a cross border claim in the EU Using the European Order for Payment Procedure or European Small Claims Procedure Where should I issue my claim? Before considering suing another person or body
More informationCollective agreements
XIVth Meeting of European Labour Court Judges 4 September 2006 Cour de cassation Paris Collective agreements National reporter: Judge Taco van Peijpe President, European Association of Labour Court Judges
More information8118/16 SH/NC/ra DGD 2
Council of the European Union Brussels, 30 May 2016 (OR. en) Interinstitutional File: 2016/0060 (CNS) 8118/16 JUSTCIV 71 LEGISLATIVE ACTS AND OTHER INSTRUMTS Subject: COUNCIL REGULATION implementing enhanced
More informationNote on the relationship between the future Hague Judgments Convention and regional arrangements, in particular the Brussels and Lugano instruments
ANNEX D February 2001 Note on the relationship between the future Hague Judgments Convention and regional arrangements, in particular the Brussels and Lugano instruments drawn up by the Permanent Bureau
More informationJudgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 19 January Commission of the European Communities v Federal Republic of Germany
Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 19 January 2006 Commission of the European Communities v Federal Republic of Germany Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations - Article 49 EC - Freedom to
More informationDirectorate-General Internal Policies Policy Department C Citizens Rights and Constitutional Affairs
Directorate-General Internal Policies Policy Department C Citizens Rights and Constitutional Affairs MAINTENANCE OBLIGATIONS AND WHAT TRAINING FOR JUDGES TO DEAL WITH CROSS BORDER ISSUES (ESPECIALLY FOCUSED
More informationREGULATORY COMPETITION IN EUROPE AFTER LAVAL. Centre for Business Research, University of Cambridge Working Paper No. 364
REGULATORY COMPETITION IN EUROPE AFTER LAVAL Centre for Business Research, University of Cambridge Working Paper No. 364 by Simon Deakin Centre for Business Research University of Cambridge Judge Business
More informationEUROPEAN UNION. Brussels, 30 November 2012 (OR. en) 2010/0383 (COD) PE-CONS 56/12 JUSTCIV 294 CODEC 2277 OC 536
EUROPEAN UNION THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMT THE COUNCIL Brussels, 30 November 2012 (OR. en) 2010/0383 (COD) PE-CONS 56/12 JUSTCIV 294 CODEC 2277 OC 536 LEGISLATIVE ACTS AND OTHER INSTRUMTS Subject: REGULATION
More informationCOMMISSION v GERMANY. JUDGMENT OF THE COURT (First Chamber) 19 January 2006*
COMMISSION v GERMANY JUDGMENT OF THE COURT (First Chamber) 19 January 2006* In Case C-244/04, ACTION under Article 226 EC for failure to fulfil obligations, brought on 8 June 2004, Commission of the European
More informationWIPO ARBITRATION AND MEDIATION CENTER
For more information contact the: World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) and Mediation Center Address: 34, chemin des Colombettes P.O. Box 18 CH-1211 Geneva 20 Switzerland WIPO ARBITRATION AND
More informationJurisdiction, Choice of Law and Dispute Resolution in
Jurisdiction, Choice of Law and Dispute Resolution in International E-Commerce Boston Bar Association International Arbitration Committee Richard Johnston and Ken Slade Hale and Dorr LLP January 24, 2000
More informationThe enforcement of jurisdiction after Brexit
The enforcement of jurisdiction after Brexit Christopher Riehn Annett Schubert Lennart Mewes EJTN Themis competition 2017 Semi-Final C: International Judicial Cooperation in Civil Matters European Civil
More informationWIPO WORLD INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY ORGANISATION ARBITRATION RULES
APPENDIX 3.17 WIPO WORLD INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY ORGANISATION ARBITRATION RULES (as from 1 October 2002) I. GENERAL PROVISIONS Abbreviated Expressions Article 1 In these Rules: Arbitration Agreement means
More informationCHAPTER 4 THE ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION ACT. Arrangement of Sections.
CHAPTER 4 THE ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION ACT. Arrangement of Sections. Section 1. Application. 2. Interpretation. PART I PRELIMINARY. PART II ARBITRATION. 3. Form of arbitration agreement. 4. Waiver
More informationThe European succession regulation Brussels IV
The European succession regulation Brussels IV Edward Reed, Macfarlanes LLP 25 November 2017 macfarlanes.com Pre-ESR succession conflicts of law/p.i.l. rules Conflicts of law/p.i.l. issues jurisdiction
More informationStandard terms and conditions
müller quadax gmbh Teslastraße 6 74670 Forchtenberg Germany Tel. +49 7947 828-20 Fax +49 7947 828-14 Email info@quadax.de Website www.quadax.de Section 1 General / scope of application (1) These standard
More informationCUSC - SECTION 7 CUSC DISPUTE RESOLUTION CONTENTS
CUSC - SECTION 7 CUSC DISPUTE RESOLUTION CONTENTS 7.1 Introduction 7.2 Disputes 7.3 Charging Disputes 7.4 Other Disputes 7.5 Third Party Claims V1.3 1 st August 2014 7.1 INTRODUCTION CUSC - SECTION 7 CUSC
More informationBrexit - impact on governing law and dispute resolution. Jef Swinnen Rachid El Abr 1
Brexit - impact on governing law and dispute resolution Jef Swinnen Rachid El Abr 1 In short Scope Legal instruments Major impact in practice? Applicable law EU Rome I and Rome II Regulations LIMITED Arbitration
More informationREVISION TO BRUSSELS I CONFERENCE CONTRACT AND TORT INTRODUCTION
REVISION TO BRUSSELS I CONFERENCE CONTRACT AND TORT Paper by Brian Murray SC 14 th May 2011 INTRODUCTION 1. Obviously, for most practitioners, most of the time, the most important jurisdictional rules
More informationJudicial Cooperation in Criminal Matters in Europe
Judicial Cooperation in Criminal Matters in Europe Module V - Bilateral and multilateral instruments of judicial cooperation in criminal matters Topic 17: Bilateral and European Union Conventions with
More informationJudicial Cooperation in Civil and Commercial Matters
Judicial Cooperation in Civil and Commercial Matters Ministry of Justice and Public Administration Department for International Legal Assistance in Civil Matters Regulation (EC) No 1393/2007 of the European
More informationThe European Small Claims procedure in the Netherlands
The European Small Claims procedure in the Netherlands Regulation (EC) No 861/2007 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 July 2007 establishing a European small claims procedure. Summary
More informationThe Brussels I Review Proposal Challenges for the Lugano Convention? The Brussels I Review Proposal Facts and Figures, 10 February 2011
The Brussels I Review Proposal Challenges for the Lugano Convention? Conference of the British Institute of International and Comparative Law, London The Brussels I Review Proposal Facts and Figures, 10
More informationCross-border. The anti-suit injunction: on borrowed time? Ian Meredith and Sarah Munro, K&L Gates
PLC Cross-border PRACTICAL LAW COMPANY The anti-suit injunction: on borrowed time? Ian Meredith and Sarah Munro, K&L Gates Legal and Commercial Publishing Limited 2007. This article first appeared on PLC
More informationPLEASE NOTE. For more information concerning the history of this Act, please see the Table of Public Acts.
PLEASE NOTE This document, prepared by the Legislative Counsel Office, is an office consolidation of this Act, current to January 1, 2009. It is intended for information and reference purposes only. This
More informationPrivate International Law Act
Issuer: Riigikogu Type: act In force from: 20.03.2016 In force until: 05.07.2017 Translation published: 14.03.2016 Amended by the following acts Passed 27.03.2002 RT I 2002, 35, 217 Entry into force 01.07.2002
More informationArticle 7. 1) Act No. 114/2012, Article 2.
Act on the rights and obligations of foreign undertakings that post workers temporarily in Iceland and on their workers terms and condition of employment, No. 45/2007, as amended by Act No. 88/2008, No.
More information