- 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-87/10: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale Ordinario di Vicenza — Sezione distaccata di Schio (Italy) lodged on 15 February 2010 — Electrosteel Europe SA v Edil Centro SpA
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62010CN0087
62010CN0087
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
17.4.2010
Official Journal of the European Union
C 100/30
(Case C-87/10)
2010/C 100/45
Language of the case: Italian
Referring court
Parties to the main proceedings
Applicant: Electrosteel Europe SA
Defendant: Edil Centro SpA
Question referred
Must Article 5(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 44/01 — and, in any event, Community law — which lays down that, in the case of the sale of goods, the place of performance of an obligation is the place where, under the contract, the goods were delivered or should have been delivered, be interpreted as meaning that the place of delivery, relevant for the purposes of determining the court having jurisdiction, is the place of final destination of the goods covered by the contract or the place in which the seller is discharged of his obligation to deliver, in accordance with the substantive rules applicable to the individual case, or is that rule open to a different interpretation?
(1) 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).