EUPillar C-462/06 Glaxosmithkline and Laboratoires Glaxosmithkline v Jean-Pierre Rouard (First Chamber) [2008] ECR I-03965

Summary

Rouard was dismissed in 2001 and brought an action before a French Employment Tribunal against Laboratoires Glaxosmithkline (a French company) and Glaxosmithkline (a UK company). Rouard requests that those companies be ordered to pay him compensation and damages for breach of his employment contract. Rouard submits that those two companies were his joint employers and as the French courts have jurisdiction in respect of Laboratoires Glaxosmithkline, they should also have jurisdiction, pursuant to Art 6(1) of Brussels I, in respect of Glaxosmithkline. Those companies disputed the jurisdiction of the French courts losing at first instance but winning in the first appeal. In the final appeal the referring court essentially asked the CJEU whether the rule of special jurisdiction in Art 6(1) in respect of co-defendants is applicable to the action brought by an employee against two companies established in different Member States which he considers to have been his joint employers. In the Regulation, jurisdiction over individual contracts of employment is the subject of Section 5 of Chapter II (S5). S5, which contains Arts 18 to 21 of the Regulation, seeks to ensure that employees are afforded the protection referred to in Recital 13 thereto. It is apparent from the wording of the provisions of S5 that they are not only specific but also exhaustive. Thus, it is clear from Art 18(1) of the Regulation, first, that any dispute concerning an individual contract of employment must be brought before a court designated in accordance with the jurisdiction rules laid down in S5 and, second, that those jurisdiction rules cannot be amended or supplemented by other rules of jurisdiction laid down in that Regulation unless specific reference is made thereto in S5 itself. Art 6(1) of the Regulation does not fall within S5 and it is not referred to there, unlike Art 4 and Art 5(5), the application of which is preserved expressly by Art 18(1) thereof. It is therefore clear that a literal interpretation of S5 leads to the conclusion that that section precludes any recourse to Art 6(1). As regards the possibility of interpreting Art 6(1) as meaning that only an employee should be able to rely on that provision, as suggested by AG Poiares Maduro, would run counter to the wording of the provisions of both Art 6(1) and S5. In addition, there would be no reason to restrict the protective logic of such an argument to Art 6(1), alone, and it would be necessary to accept that employees, and they alone, should be able to rely on any rule of special jurisdiction provided for in Brussels I which could serve their individual interests. The transformation by the CJEU of the rules of special jurisdiction, aimed at facilitating sound administration of justice, into rules of unilateral jurisdiction protecting the party deemed to be weaker would go beyond the balance of interests which the Community legislature has established in the law as it currently stands. Therefore, such an interpretation would be difficult to reconcile with the principle of legal certainty, which is one of the objectives of the Regulation and which requires, in particular, that rules of jurisdiction be interpreted in such a way as to be highly predictable, as stated in Recital 11. Brussels I, notwithstanding the objective of protection referred to in Recital 13, does not afford particular protection to an employee in a situation such as Rouard’s since, as a claimant before the national courts, there is no rule of jurisdiction available to him that is more favourable than the general rule laid down in Art 2. In those circumstances, the answer to the question referred must be that the rule of special jurisdiction provided for in Art 6(1) of Brussels I cannot be applied to a dispute falling under S5 concerning the jurisdiction rules applicable to individual contracts of employment. Art 20(1) of Brussels Ia allows employees to bring proceedings under Art 8(1) (formerly 6(1)).