E-2/21 Norep AS v Haugen Gruppen AS

EFTA-case  

Klik hier voor het dossier van het EVA-hof (voor zover beschikbaar).

Deadlines: Motivation ministry:    30 August 2021
Written observations:                    12 July 2021

Keywords : commercial agents; contract termination; customers;

Subject :

Council Directive 86/653/EEC of 18 December 1986 on the coordination of the laws of the Member States relating to self-employed commercial agents;

Facts of the case:

The appellant in the case is Norep AS, whilst the respondent is Haugen Gruppen AS. The case concerns Norep AS’s claim for remuneration upon termination of a contract under the Norwegian legislation on commercial agents. That claim was not successful before the District Court or the Court of Appeal in their judgments on the ground that Norep AS could not be deemed to be a “commercial agent” as defined in the first paragraph of section 1 of that legislation. The case raises questions of interpretation of Council Directive 86/653/EEC of 18 December 1986 on the coordination of the laws of the Member States relating to self-employed commercial agents. Those rules are implemented in Norwegian law by the Commercial Agents Act. The Supreme Court now requests the EFTA Court to give an Advisory Opinion on the precise substance of the rule laid down in the first option under Article 1(2) of the Directive, more specifically the term “negotiate”.

Application summary:

1. Shall the term “negotiate” in Article 1(2) of Directive 86/653 be interpreted as presupposing involvement with orders from customers to the principal, with the result that the orders may not go directly from customers to the principal, as the facts in the present case is described in Chapter 3 above?

2. If question 1 is answered in the negative, which factors are relevant in the assessment of whether sales-related activity is to be deemed to be “negotiation” for the purposes of Article 1(2) of Directive 86/653?

Cited (recent) case-law: Trendsetteuse SARL v DCA SARL (C-828/18); Engie Cartagena, C-523/18; Spiegel Online, C-516/17; Marchon Germany, C-315/14; Zako, C-452/17;

Policy Area: EZK; SZW