- 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-64/12: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Hoge Raad der Nederlanden (Netherlands) lodged on 8 February 2012 — A. Schlecker, trading under the name, ‘Firma Anton Schlecker’ , other party: M.J. Boedeker
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62012CN0064
62012CN0064
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
28.4.2012
Official Journal of the European Union
C 126/5
(Case C-64/12)
2012/C 126/09
Language of the case: Dutch
Referring court
Parties to the main proceedings
Applicant: A. Schlecker, trading under the name, ‘Firma Anton Schlecker’
Defendant: M.J. Boedeker
Questions referred
1.Should Article 6(2) of the Convention on the law applicable to contractual obligations be interpreted in such a way that, if an employee carries out the work in performance of the contract not only habitually but also for a lengthy period and without interruption in the same country, the law of that country should be applied in all cases, even if all other circumstances point to a close connection between the employment contract and another country?
2.Does an affirmative answer to Question 1 require that the employer and the employee, when concluding the contract of employment, or at least at the commencement of the work, intended, or at least were aware of the fact, that the work would be carried out over a long period and without interruption in the same country?
(1) Convention on the law applicable to contractual obligations, opened for signature in Rome on 19 June 1980 (OJ 1980 L 266, p. 1).
* * *