PIL instrument(s)
Brussels I
Case number and/or case name
LAG Düsseldorf, 28.5.2014 – 12 Sa 1423/13
Details of the court
Germany, Second Instance
Articles referred to by the court
Brussels I
Article 1
Paragraph 1
Article 5
Paragraph 1 SubParagraph a
Paragraph 1 SubParagraph b Indent 1
Article 15
Paragraph 1 SubParagraph a
Article 18
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 2
Article 19
Paragraph 2 SubParagraph a
Article 21
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 2
Article 23
Paragraph 1 SubParagraph a
Date of the judgement
27 May 2014
Appeal history
CJEU's case law cited by the court
Summary
The parties argued about the payment of leave compensation. It was doubtful whether German courts had international jurisdiction. The court denied the international jurisdiction of German courts. It first stated the importance of an autonomous interpretation of the term ‘individual contracts of employment’ in Art. 18 (1) Brussels I. The definition wasn’t to be interpreted in accordance with national rules of labour law. The court further held that an analogous application of the rules in Art. 18 to 21 Brussels I to independents who were in need for social protection and only worked for one employer wasn’t possible. The judgment is correct. The special jurisdiction established by Art. 18 et seq. can’t be extended by analogy to independents. The relevant aspect is the lack of dependence within the labour relation regarding the manner of the work in terms of time, place and content. A mere financial dependence from the employer isn’t sufficient to apply the rules in Art. 18 et seq. Brussels.

This website is written and maintained by the University of Aberdeen's Research Applications and Data Management Team