Judgment of the Court; 10 March 1992; Powell Duffryn plc v Wolfgang Petereit; in Case C-214/89
1. A clause contained in the statutes of a company limited by shares and adopted in accordance with the provisions of the applicable national law and those statutes themselves conferring jurisdiction on a court of a Contracting State to settle disputes between that company and its shareholders constitutes an agreement conferring jurisdiction within the meaning of Article 17 of the Brussels Convention;
2. Irrespective of how shares are acquired, the formal requirements laid down in Article 17 must be considered to be complied with in regard to any shareholder if the clause conferring jurisdiction is contained in the statutes of the company and those statutes are lodged in a place to which the shareholder may have access or are contained in a public register;
3. The requirement that a dispute arise in connection with a particular legal relationship within the meaning of Article 17 is satisfied if the clause conferring jurisdiction contained in the statutes of a company may be interpreted as referring to the disputes between the company and its shareholders as such;
4. It is for the national court to interpret the clause conferring jurisdiction invoked before it in order to determine which disputes fall within its scope.
- Reforma dokaznega prava v digitalni dobi
- Raznolikost izvršilnih naslovov pri čezmejni izterjavi dolgov v EU
- Train to Enforce
- Pravna sredstva v zvezi z izvrševanjem tujih sodnih odločb po Bruselj Ia (prenovitev)
- LAWTrain
- Razvoj in trendi v pravni ureditvi odvetništva v Sloveniji in Nemčiji
- Kontinentalno pravo proti "Common law" - presoja "pravil" dokaznega prava (testiranje dopustnosti elektronskih dokazov v anglosaškem in kontinentalnem pravnem sistemu)
- Razsežnosti dokazovanja v evropskem civilnem postopku
- Poenostavljena izterjava denarnih obveznosti v EU
- Vloga Pravne fakultete
- Konference in ostale aktivnosti
- Rezultati projekta
- Council regulation (EC) No 1346/2000
- Council Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003
- Council Regulation (EC) No 1206/2001
- Council Regulation (EC) No 1348/2000
- Brussels Regulation
- Brussels Convention
- Protocol on the interpretation of the Brussels Convention
- Brussels Convention
- Article 1
- Article 2
- Article 3
- Article 5 no. 1
- Article 5 no. 2
- Article 5 no. 3
- Article 5 no. 5
- Article 6
- Article 7
- Article 12
- Article 13
- Article 16 no. 1
- Article 16 no. 4
- Article 16 no. 5
- Article 17
- Judgment of the Court; 14 December 1976; Estasis Salotti di Colzani Aimo et Gianmario Colzani v Rüwa Polstereimaschinen GmbH; in Case 24-76
- Judgment of the Court; 14 December 1976; Galeries Segoura SPRL v Société Rahim Bonakdarian; in Case 25-76
- Judgment of the Court; 9 November 1978; Nikolaus Meeth v Glacetal; in Case 23/78
- Judgment of the Court; 17 January 1980; Siegfried Zelger v Sebastiano Salinitri; in Case 56/79
- Judgment of the Court; 13 November 1979; Sanicentral GmbH v René Collin; in Case 25/79
- Judgment of the Court; 24 June 1981; Elefanten Schuh GmbH v Pierre Jacqmain; in Case 150/80
- Judgment of the Court; 14 July 1983; Gerling Konzern Speziale Kreditversicherungs-AG and others v Amministrazione del Tesoro dello Stato; in Case 201/82
- Judgment of the Court; 19 June 1984; Partenreederei ms. Tilly Russ and Ernest Russ v NV Haven- & Vervoerbedrijf Nova and NV Goeminne Hout; in Case 71/83
- Judgment of the Court; 7 March 1985; Hannelore Spitzley v Sommer Exploitation SA; in Case 48/84
- Judgment of the Court; 11 July 1985; F. Berghoefer GmbH & Co. KG v ASA SA; in Case 221/84
- Judgment of the Court; 11 November 1986; SpA Iveco Fiat v Van Hool NV; in Case 313/85
- Judgment of the Court; 10 March 1992; Powell Duffryn plc v Wolfgang Petereit; in Case C-214/89
- Judgment of the Court; 29 June 1994; Custom Made Commercial Ltd v Stawa Metallbau GmbH; in Case C-288/92
- Judgment of the Court; 20 February 1997; Mainschiffahrts-Genossenschaft eG (MSG) v Les Gravières Rhénanes SARL; in Case C-106/95
- Judgment of the Court; 3 July 1997; Francesco Benincasa v Dentalkit Srl.; in Case C-269/95
- Judgment of the Court; 16 March 1999; Trasporti Castelletti Spedizioni Internazionali SpA v Hugo Trumpy SpA; in Case C-159/97
- Judgement of the Court; 9 November 2000; in Case C-387/98; Coreck Maritime GmbH and Handelsveem BV and Others
- Judgment of the Court; 24 June 1986; Rudolf Anterist v Crédit Lyonnais; in Case 22/85
- Article 18
- Article 19
- Article 21
- Article 22
- Article 23
- Article 24
- Article 25
- Article 26
- Article 27 no. 1
- Article 27 no. 2
- Article 27 no. 3
- Article 30
- Article 31
- Article 33
- Article 36
- Article 37
- Article 38
- Article 39
- Article 40
- Article 46
- Article 47
- Article 50
- Article 52
- Article 54
- Article 55
- Article 56
- Article 57
- Brussels Regulation
- Council Regulation (EC) No 1206/2001
- Council regulation (EC) No 1348/2000
- Council Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003
- Council regulation (EC) No 1346/2000
- Evropski izvršilni naslov
- Medicina, pravo in družba
- CRP Vročanje