23.12.2019

Official Journal of the European Union

C 432/8

(Case C-213/18) (<span class="super note-tag">1</span>)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Judicial cooperation in civil matters - Jurisdiction, recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters - Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 - Article 7(1)(a) - Competent court in matters relating to a contract - Common rules on compensation and assistance to passengers in the event of denied boarding and of cancellation or long delay of flights - Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 - Articles 5, 7, 9 and 12 - Montreal Convention - Jurisdiction - Articles 19 and 33 - Application for compensation and compensation for damage resulting from the cancellation and delay of flights)

(2019/C 432/08)

Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicants: Adriano Guaitoli, Concepción Casan Rodriguez, Alessandro Celano Tomassoni, Antonia Cirilli, Lucia Cortini, Mario Giuli, Patrizia Padroni

Defendant: easyJet Airline Co. Ltd

Operative part of the judgment

1.Article 7(1), Article 67 and Article 71(1) of Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2012 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters, and Article 33 of the Convention for the Unification of Certain Rules for International Carriage by Air, concluded in Montreal on 28 May 1999 and approved on behalf of the European Community by Council Decision 2001/539/EC of 5 April 2001, must be interpreted as meaning that the court of a Member State hearing an action to obtain both compliance with the flat-rate and standardised rights provided for in 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, and compensation for further damage falling within the scope of that convention, must assess its jurisdiction, for the first head of claim, in the light of Article 7(1) of Regulation No 1215/2012, and, for the second head of claim, in the light of Article 33 of that convention;

2.Article 33(1) of the Convention for the Unification of Certain Rules for International Carriage by Air, concluded at Montreal on 28 May 1999, must be interpreted, as regards actions for damages falling within the scope of that convention, as governing not only the allocation of jurisdiction as between the States Parties to the convention, but also the allocation of territorial jurisdiction as between the courts of each of those States.

(<span class="note">1</span>) OJ C 240, 9.7.2018.