7.5.2011

Official Journal of the European Union

C 139/9

(Case C-29/10) (<span class="super">1</span>)

(Rome Convention on the law applicable to contractual obligations - Contract of employment - Choice made by the parties - Mandatory rules of the law applicable in the absence of choice - Determination of that law - Notion of the country in which the employee ‘habitually carries out his work’ - Employee carrying out his work in more than one Contracting State)

2011/C 139/14

Language of the case: French

Referring court

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Heiko Koelzsch

Defendant: État du Grand-Duché de Luxembourg

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Cour d’appel — Interpretation of Article 6(2)(a) 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) — Determination of the law applicable to an action for wrongful dismissal in the absence of a choice by the parties to an individual employment contract — Concept of place ‘in which the employee habitually carries out his work’ — Employee working in more than one country but returning systematically to one of them

Operative part of the judgment

Article 6(2)(a) of the Convention on the law applicable to contractual obligations, opened for signature in Rome on 19 June 1980, must be interpreted as meaning that, in a situation in which an employee carries out his activities in more than one Contracting State, the country in which the employee habitually carries out his work in performance of the contract, within the meaning of that provision, is that in which or from which, in the light of all the factors which characterise that activity, the employee performs the greater part of his obligations towards his employer.

* Language of the case: French.

(OJ C 80, 27.3.2010)

ECLI:EU:C:2011:140