Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber), 17 October 2013

United Antwerp Maritime Agencies (Unamar) NV v Navigation Maritime Bulgare

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Hof van Cassatie (Belgium)

Rome Convention on the law applicable to contractual obligations — Articles 3 and 7(2) — Freedom of choice of the parties — Limits — Mandatory rules — Directive 86/653/EEC — Self-employed commercial agents — Contracts for sale or purchase of goods — Termination of the agency contract by the principal — National implementing legislation providing for protection going beyond the minimum requirements of the directive and providing also for protection for commercial agents in the context of contracts for the supply of services

Case C‑184/12


Top of the page Documents in the Case
Document Date Name of the parties Subject-matter Curia EUR-Lex
Judgment (OJ)
29/11/2013 Unamar
View pdf documents
Judgment
ECLI:EU:C:2013:663
17/10/2013 Unamar
EUR-Lex text EUR-Lex bilingual text
Judgment (Summary)
ECLI:EU:C:2013:663
17/10/2013 Unamar
Opinion
ECLI:EU:C:2013:301
15/05/2013 Unamar
EUR-Lex text EUR-Lex bilingual text
Application (OJ)
22/06/2012 Unamar
View pdf documents
Top of the page Legal analysis of the decision or of the case

Reports of Cases

published in the electronic Reports of Cases (Court Reports - general)

Subject-matter

Reference for a preliminary ruling – Hof van Cassatie van België – Interpretation of Articles 3 and 7(2) of the Convention on the law applicable to contractual obligations, opened for signature in Rome on 19 June 1980 (OJ 1980 L 266, p. 1), and Council Directive 86/653/EEC of 18 December 1986 on the coordination of the laws of the Member States relating to self-employed commercial agents (OJ 1986 L 382, p. 17) – Freedom of choice of the parties – Limits – Commercial agency contract – Clause designating the law of the State of the principal to be the applicable law – Bringing of a case before the court of the commercial agent’s place of establishment

Systematic classification scheme

Information not available


Citations of case-law or legislation

References in grounds of judgment

  • Directive 86/653 : paragraphs 1, 19, 26, 29, 30, 33, 34, 36, 38, 40, 50 - 52
  • Directive 86/653 -A01P1 : paragraph 10
  • Directive 86/653 -A01P2 : paragraph 10
  • Directive 86/653 -A17 : paragraphs 11, 39 - 41
  • Directive 86/653 -A18 : paragraphs 12, 39 - 41
  • Directive 86/653 -A19 : paragraph 40
  • Directive 86/653 -A22 : paragraph 13
  • Directive 86/653 -C1 : paragraph 9
  • Directive 86/653 -C2 : paragraphs 9, 37
  • Directive 86/653 -C3 : paragraph 9
  • Directive 86/653 -C4 : paragraph 9
  • Regulation 593/2008 : paragraphs 8, 49
  • Regulation 593/2008 -A09P1 : paragraphs 8, 48
  • Regulation 593/2008 -A09P2 : paragraph 8
  • Rome Convention 1980 : paragraphs 1, 27, 35, 49, 51
  • Rome Convention 1980 -A01P1 : paragraph 4
  • Rome Convention 1980 -A03 : paragraphs 5, 26, 29, 52
  • Rome Convention 1980 -A03P1 : paragraph 49
  • Rome Convention 1980 -A07 : paragraphs 6, 24, 41
  • Rome Convention 1980 -A07P1 : paragraphs 42, 43, 45
  • Rome Convention 1980 -A07P2 : paragraphs 26, 29, 32, 33, 42, 44, 45, 46, 49, 52
  • Rome Convention 1980 -A18 : paragraph 7
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -28/95 : paragraph 31
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -369/96 : paragraphs 46, 47
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -376/96 : paragraph 46
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -215/97 : paragraphs 36, 38
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -381/98 : paragraphs 37, 40
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -3/04 : paragraph 30
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -465/04 : paragraph 36
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -319/06 : paragraph 47
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -348/07 : paragraph 36
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -203/09 : paragraph 30
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -470/11 : paragraph 28

Operative part

  • Interprets : Rome Convention 1980 -A03
  • Interprets : Rome Convention 1980 -A07P2

Opinion

  • Directive 86/653 : points 1, 19, 25, 35, 44 - 61
  • Directive 86/653 -A01P2 : points 7, 46 - 49
  • Directive 86/653 -A04P2LA : point 49
  • Directive 86/653 -A06P1 : point 49
  • Directive 86/653 -A17 : points 52, 57
  • Directive 86/653 -A17P1 : point 8
  • Directive 86/653 -A20P2LB : point 49
  • Directive 86/653 -C2 : point 6
  • Regulation 593/2008 : points 1, 34
  • Regulation 593/2008 -A09 : point 32
  • Regulation 593/2008 -A09P1 : points 32, 43
  • Regulation 593/2008 -A28 : point 1
  • Rome Convention 1980 : point 41
  • Rome Convention 1980 -A03 : points 1, 4, 19, 61
  • Rome Convention 1980 -A03P1 : point 28
  • Rome Convention 1980 -A07 : points 29, 30
  • Rome Convention 1980 -A07P1 : point 30
  • Rome Convention 1980 -A07P2 : points 1, 3, 5, 19, 24 - 44, 53, 58, 61
  • Agreement between Member States - 41998A0126(03) -A01 : point 1
  • Agreement between Member States - 41998A0126(03) -A02LA : point 1
  • Commission - COM Document (Draft Legislation) - 51976PC0670 : point 50
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -369/96 : points 32 - 34, 37, 43
  • Court of Justice - Opinion C -381/98 : point 35
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -381/98 : points 35, 56, 59, 60
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -52/00 : point 44
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -44/01 : point 42
  • Court of Justice - Order C -449/01 : points 49, 50
  • Court of Justice - Order C -85/03 : point 49
  • Court of Justice - Opinion C -3/04 : point 48
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -3/04 : point 48
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -192/04 : point 44
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -465/04 : points 56, 57
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -319/06 : points 32 - 34
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -159/09 : point 42
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -467/10 : point 41
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -500/10 : point 22
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -599/10 : point 22


Dates

Date of the lodging of the application initiating proceedings

  • 20/04/2012

Date of the Opinion

  • 15/05/2013

Date of the hearing

Information not available

Date of delivery

17/10/2013


References

Publication in the Official Journal

Application: OJ C 200 from 07.07.2012, p.6

Judgment: OJ C 367 from 14.12.2013, p.12

Name of the parties

Unamar

Notes on Academic Writings

  1. Franssen, E.J.A.: Jurisprudentie arbeidsrecht 2013 nº 302 (NL)
  2. Nourissat, Cyril: De l'art délicat de manier les lois de police en présence d'un contrat d'agence commerciale intra-européen…, La Semaine Juridique - édition générale 2013 nº 49 p.2222-2226 (FR)
  3. Idot, Laurence: Statut des agents commerciaux et qualification de lois de police, Europe 2013 Décembre Comm. nº 12 p.54-55 (FR)
  4. D'Avout, Louis: Les directives européennes, les lois de police de transposition et leur application aux contrats internationaux, Recueil Le Dalloz 2014 p.60-64 (FR)
  5. Von Bodungen, Thilo: "Rechtswahl hilft nicht immer", Betriebs-Berater 2014 p.403 (DE)
  6. Lüttringhaus, Jan D.: Eingriffsnormen im internationalen Unionsprivat- und Prozessrecht: Von Ingmar zu Unamar, Praxis des internationalen Privat- und Verfahrensrechts 2014 p.146-152 (DE)
  7. Cachard, Olivier: Les lois de police communautaires n'existent pas, ce n'est qu'une illusion..., Le droit maritime français 2014 p.299-307 (FR)
  8. Dalmazir, Pauline: Lorsque la Cour a ses raisons que la raison ignore: à propos de l'arrêt Unamar, Revue Lamy droit des affaires 2014 nº 92 p.56-59 (FR)
  9. Hollander, Pascal: L'arrêt Unamar de la Cour de justice: une bombe atomique sur le droit belge de la distribution commerciale?, Journal des tribunaux 2014 p.297-301 (FR)
  10. Jacquet, Jean-Michel: Conflits de lois, Journal du droit international 2014 p.625-639 (FR)
  11. Deumier, Pascale: Les lois de transposition, lois de police, Revue des contrats 2014 p.80-82 (FR)
  12. van Hoek, A.A.H.: Beëindigingsvergoedingen voor handelsagenten en algemeen belang, Ars aequi 2014 p.466-479 (NL)
  13. Kuipers , Jan-Jaap ; Vlek, Jochem: Het Hof van Justitie en de bescherming van de handelsagent : over voorrangsregels, dwingende bepalingen en openbare orde, Nederlands internationaal privaatrecht 2014 nº 198-206 (NL)
  14. Van Overbeeke, Fieke: Dwingende bepalingen van Unierecht, S.E.W. ; Sociaal-economische wetgeving 2014 p. 412-416 (NL)
  15. Pironon, Valérie: Harmonisation a minima et conflits de lois de transposition : quelle place pour la méthode des lois de police ?, Revue de l'Union européenne 2014 n° 579 p.376-377 (FR)
  16. Schilling, Johannes: Eingriffsnormen im europäischen Richtlinienrecht, Zeitschrift für europäisches Privatrecht 2014 p.845-860 (DE)
  17. Kühne, Gunther: Rechtswahl und Eingriffsnormen in der Rechtssprechung des EuGH, Global wisdom on business transactions, international law and dispute resolution (Festschrift für Gerhard Wegen zum 65. Geburtstag) (Ed. C.H. Beck - München) 2015 p.451-462 (DE)
  18. Verbeke, Lino: De wilsautonomie niet zo autonoom als gedacht, Tijdschrft voor Internationale Handel en Transportrecht 2015 p. 114-117 (NL)
  19. Rühl, Giesela: Commercial agents, minimum harmonization and overriding mandatory provisions in the European Union: Unamar, Common Market Law Review 2016 p. 209–224 (EN)
  20. Temnikov, Oleg: Европейски правен преглед 2017 nº 18 p. 82-98 (BG)



Procedural Analysis Information

Source of the question referred for a preliminary ruling

Hof van Cassatie - Belgium

Subject-matter

  • Rome Convention of 19 June 1980
  • Freedom of establishment
  • Freedom to provide services

Provisions of national law referred to

Information not available

Provisions of international law referred to

Information not available

Procedure and result

  • Reference for a preliminary ruling

Formation of the Court

troisième chambre (Cour)

Judge-Rapporteur

Toader

Advocate General

Wahl

Language(s) of the Case

  • Dutch

Language(s) of the Opinion

  • French