Case number and/or case name
LAG Berlin, 14.1.2009 – 17 Sa 1719/08
Summary
The claimant, domiciled in Germany, and the defendant are in dispute over the effect of the claimant's dismissal by the defendant. The claimant was employed as a chauffeur at the defendant’s Berlin embassy. The employment contract concluded between the parties contained a jurisdiction clause in favour of Algerian courts. The claimant lodged a claim due to unfair dismissal before the Labour Court of Berlin.
The defendant argued that German courts did not have international jurisdiction. The Labour Court dismissed the claim because of lack of jurisdiction. The claimant appealed to the Regional Labour Court Berlin against this decision.
The Regional Labour Court states that international jurisdiction is based on Article 19(1) Brussels I Regulation because the defendant’s Berlin embassy represents a branch within the meaning of Article 18(2). The embassy does not serve to complete commercial activities but instead is the defendant’s diplomatic representative. The embassy however possesses its own management and concludes independent contracts.
The Brussels I Regulation does not contain rules saying that the diplomatic representations of foreign states should be excluded from the scope of its application. According to Article 1 Brussels I Regulation, the purpose of a state’s establishment in another Member State is not relevant.
Under Article 18(2), it is sufficient that the employer holds a branch with its own management and participates in legal relations of a civil and commercial nature from this branch. These requirements have been fulfilled by the defendant’s embassy. The jurisdiction agreement is therefore ineffective according to Article 21 of the Brussels I Regulation, and German courts have international jurisdiction.
The court's decision is correct.