|
Publishers Abstract:
Some four years after the Service Regulation entering into force it has generated in Gotz Leffler v. Berlin Chemie AG the first judgment stemming from a reference for a preliminary ruling by the Dutch Hoge Raad, the stage is opened with a grande premiere. Gotz Leffler, resident in the Netherlands, applied to the President of the Rechtbank Arnhem by writ of Jun 21, 2001 for interim relief against Berlin Chemie AG, a company governed by German law and established in Germany, in order to recover goods taken by way of seizure by Berlin Chemie and to obtain an order prohibiting further such seizure. As evident, interpretation and analysis of Article 8(1) of the Service Regulation takes centre stage. It is the central provision in the compromise between applicant's and addressee's interests in the minefield of service.
|
