Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber), 16 January 2014

Andreas Kainz v Pantherwerke AG

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Oberster Gerichtshof

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Jurisdiction in civil and commercial matters — Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 — Liability for a defective product — Product manufactured in one Member State and sold in another Member State — Interpretation of the concept of ‘the place where the harmful event occurred or may occur’ — Place of the event giving rise to the damage

Case C‑45/13


Top of the page Documents in the Case
Document Date Name of the parties Subject-matter Curia EUR-Lex Autres Liens
Judgment (OJ)
07/03/2014 Kainz
area of freedom, security and justice
- Judicial cooperation in civil matters
  • area of freedom, security and justice
  • - Judicial cooperation in civil matters
View pdf documents
Judgment
ECLI:EU:C:2014:7		 16/01/2014 Kainz
area of freedom, security and justice
- Judicial cooperation in civil matters
  • area of freedom, security and justice
  • - Judicial cooperation in civil matters
EUR-Lex text EUR-Lex bilingual text
Judgment (Summary)
ECLI:EU:C:2014:7		 16/01/2014 Kainz
area of freedom, security and justice
- Judicial cooperation in civil matters
  • area of freedom, security and justice
  • - Judicial cooperation in civil matters
EUR-Lex text EUR-Lex bilingual text
Application (OJ)
03/05/2013 Kainz
area of freedom, security and justice
- Judicial cooperation in civil matters
  • area of freedom, security and justice
  • - Judicial cooperation in civil matters
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

Request for a preliminary ruling – Oberster Gerichtshof – Interpretation of Article 5(3) of Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 of 22 December 2000 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters (OJ 2001 L 12, p. 1) – Product liability – Goods produced in a Member State and sold in another Member State – Place where the harmful event occurred or may occur – Situation in which the place where the damage occurred (‘Erfolgsort’) is in the State where the goods were produced – Interpretation of the concept of the ‘place of the event giving rise to [the damage]’ (‘Handlungsort’)

Systematic classification scheme

1.
-
4 Internal policy of the European Union
  4.06 Area of freedom, security and justice
    4.06.02 Judicial cooperation in civil matters
      4.06.02.01 Jurisdiction, recognition and enforcement of judgments – Civil and commercial matters


Citations of case-law or legislation

References in grounds of judgment

Operative part

Opinion

Information not available


Dates

Date of the lodging of the application initiating proceedings

Information not available

Date of the Opinion

Information not available

Date of the hearing

Information not available

Date of delivery

16/01/2014


References

Publication in the Official Journal

Application: OJ C 147 from 25.05.2013, p.2

Judgment: OJ C 85 from 22.03.2014, p.10

Name of the parties

Kainz

Notes on Academic Writings

  1. Idot, Laurence: Compétence en matière délictuelle et responsabilité des produits défectueux, Europe 2014 Mars Comm. nº 3 p.35-36 (FR)
  2. Dietze, Jan: EuGVVO: Zuständigkeit am Handlungsort in Produkt­haftungsfällen, Europäische Zeitschrift für Wirtschaftsrecht 2014 p.234-235 (DE)
  3. Wagner, Eric: Der Ort des Inverkehrbringens ist für die Bestimmung des anwendbaren Rechts von zentraler Bedeutung, Betriebs-Berater 2014 p.661 (DE)
  4. De Clavière, Blandine: De la notion de fait dommageable en droit international privé européen et de la responsabilité du fait des produits défectueux..., Revue Lamy droit des affaires 2014 nº 92 p.60-63 (FR)
  5. Sujecki, Bartosz: Art. 5 Nr. 3 EuGVVO: In grenzüberschreitenden Produkthaftungsfällen ist Ort des ursächlichen Geschehens der Ort, an dem das Produkt hergestellt wurde - "Kainz", Europäisches Wirtschafts- & Steuerrecht - EWS 2014 p.94-95 (DE)
  6. Schmon, Christoph: "Handlungsort" in Produkthaftungssachen ist nur der Herstellungsort, Ecolex 2014 p.334-335 (DE)
  7. Wittwer, Alexander: Handlungs- und Erfolgsort bei internationaler Produkthaftung, European Law Reporter 2014 p.17-18 (DE)
  8. Strikwerda, L.: Nederlandse jurisprudentie ; Uitspraken in burgerlijke en strafzaken 2014 nº 38/39 p.4612-4614 (NL)
  9. Lheureux, Ellyn: L'arrêt Kainz: le lieu de fabrication du produit défectueux pointé du doigt, Droit de la consommation 2014 p.57-67 (FR)
  10. Laazouzi, Malik: Cour de justice, 4e ch., 16 janvier 2014, Andreas Kainz, aff. C-45/13, ECLI:EU:C:2014:7, Jurisprudence de la CJUE 2014 (Ed. Bruylant - Bruxelles) 2014 p.804-806 (FR)
  11. Laazouzi, Malik: XXI. Compétence des juridictions et lois applicables - Cour de justice, 4e ch., 16 janvier 2014, Andreas Kainz, aff. C‑45/13, ECLI:EU:C:2014:7, Jurisprudence de la CJUE 2014. Décisions et commentaires (Ed. Bruylant - Bruxelles) 2015, p. 804-806 (FR)
  12. Vanleenhove, Cedric ; De Bruyne, Jan: "Bike along, nothing to see here" -Hof van Justitie lokaliseert locus acti bij productaansprakelijkheid op de plaats waar het gebrekkige goed vervaardigd werd, Revue de droit commercial belge 2016 p.81-85 (NL)



Procedural Analysis Information

Source of the question referred for a preliminary ruling

Oberster Gerichtshof - Austria

Subject-matter

  • area of freedom, security and justice
  • - Judicial cooperation in civil matters

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

Quatrième chambre (Cour)

Judge-Rapporteur

Safjan

Advocate General

Jääskinen

Language(s) of the Case

  • German

Language(s) of the Opinion

    Information not available