Case C-412/10
Deo Antoine Homawoo
v
GMF Assurances SA
(Reference for a preliminary ruling from the High Court of Justice (England and Wales), Queen’s Bench Division)
(Judicial cooperation in civil matters – Law applicable to non-contractual obligations – Regulation (EC) No 864/2007 – Scope ratione temporis)
Summary of the Judgment
Judicial cooperation in civil matters – Law applicable to non-contractual obligations – Regulation No 864/2007 – Scope ratione temporis – Distinction made between the date of entry into force and the date of application – Meaning
(Art. 297 TFEU; European Parliament and Council Regulation No 864/2007, Arts 31 and 32)
Articles 31 and 32 of Regulation No 864/2007 on the law applicable to non‑contractual obligations (‘Rome II’), read in conjunction with Article297TFEU, must be interpreted to the effect that a national court is required to apply the regulation only to events giving rise to damage occurring after 11January 2009 and that the date on which the proceedings seeking compensation for damage were brought or the date on which the applicable law was determined by the court seised have no bearing on determining the scope ratione temporis of the regulation.
Article 31 of Regulation No 864/2007, entitled ‘Application in time’, provides that it applies to events giving rise to damage which occur after its entry into force and Article 32, entitled ‘Date of application’, provides that it applies from 11January 2009. However, for want of a specific provision fixing the date for the entry into force of the regulation, that date must be determined in accordance with the general rule laid down in the third subparagraph of Article 297(1) TFEU. The regulation having been published in the Official Journal of the European Union on 31 July 2007, it entered into force on 20 August 2007, that is to say, the 20th day following that of its publication.
In those circumstances, Article 31 of that regulation may not be interpreted without account’s being taken of the date of application laid down in Article 32 of that regulation, that is to say, 11 January 2009. That is the only interpretation that ensures, in accordance with recitals 6, 13, 14 and 16 of the regulation, the full attainment of the regulation’s objectives, that is to say, the predictability of the outcome of litigation, legal certainty as to the law applicable and the uniform application of that regulation in all the Member States. By contrast, those objectives would be likely to be compromised if the Regulation were to be applied to events occurring between its entry into force and the date set by Article32.
(see paras 23, 30, 33-35, 37, operative part)