- Query in any language with multilingual search
- Access EUR-Lex and EU Commission case law
- See relevant paragraphs highlighted instantly
Similar Documents
Explore similar documents to your case.We Found Similar Cases for You
Case C-204/08: Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 9 July 2009 (Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesgerichtshof — Germany) — Peter Rehder v Air Baltic Corporation (Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 — Second indent of Article 5(1)(b) — Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 — Articles 5(1)(c) and 7(1)(a) — Montreal Convention — Article 33(1) — Air transport — Passenger claims for compensation against airlines in the case of flight cancellation — Place of performance of the service — Jurisdiction in the case of air transport from one Member State to another Member State by an airline established in a third Member State)
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62008CA0204
62008CA0204
With us you find everything. Try it now!
I imagine what I want to write in my case, I write it in the search engine and I get exactly what I wanted. Thank you!
Valentina R., lawyer
Official Journal of the European Union
29.8.2009 *
(Case C-204/08)
(Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 - Second indent of Article 5(1)(b) - Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 - Articles 5(1)(c) and 7(1)(a) - Montreal Convention - Article 33(1) - Air transport - Passenger claims for compensation against airlines in the case of flight cancellation - Place of performance of the service - Jurisdiction in the case of air transport from one Member State to another Member State by an airline established in a third Member State)
2009/C 205/13
Language of the case: German
Referring court
Parties to the main proceedings
Applicant: Peter Rehder
Defendant: Air Baltic Corporation
Re:
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Bundesgerichtshof — Interpretation of the second indent of Article 5(1)(b) 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) — Compensation under Article 7(1)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 claimed by a passenger residing in a Member State from an air carrier established in another Member State following cancellation of a flight between the first Member State and a third member State — Jurisdiction of the courts of the Member State where the passenger resides — Determination of ‘the place in a Member State where, under the contract, the services were provided or should have been provided’.
Operative part of the judgment
The second indent of Article 5(1)(b) 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 must be interpreted as meaning that, in the case of air transport of passengers from one Member State to another Member State, carried out on the basis of a contract with only one airline, which is the operating carrier, the court having jurisdiction to deal with a claim for compensation founded on that transport contract and on Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 February 2004 establishing common rules on compensation and assistance to passengers in the event of denied boarding and of cancellation or long delay of flights, and repealing Regulation (EEC) No 295/91, is that, at the applicant’s choice, which has territorial jurisdiction over the place of departure or place of arrival of the aircraft, as those places are agreed in that contract.
* * *
(1) OJ C 197, 2.8.2008.