Peter Pammer v Reederei Karl Schluter GmbH and Co KG etc: ECJ 7 Dec 2010

ECJ (Grand Chamber) Jurisdiction in civil and commercial matters – Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 – Article 15(1)(c) and (3) – Jurisdiction over consumer contracts – Contract for a voyage by freighter – Concept of ‘package travel’ – Contract for a hotel stay – Presentation of the voyage and the hotel on a website – Concept of activity ‘directed to’ the Member State of the consumer’s domicile – Criteria – Accessibility of the website
The ECJ established the following principles: i) The trader must have manifested its intention to establish commercial relations with consumers from one or more other member states including that of the consumer’s domicile. Specifically, in the case of a contract between a trader and a given consumer, it must be determined (by reference to the trader’s websites and overall activity), whether before any contract with that consumer was concluded, there was evidence demonstrating that the trader was envisaging doing business with consumers in other member states, including the member state of that consumer’s domicile, in the sense that it was minded to conclude a contract with those consumers;
ii) While the dissemination of traditional forms of advertising in other member states, such as by the press, radio, television or other medium, may of itself demonstrate an intention of the trader to direct its activities towards those states, the mere establishment of a website which is accessible in other member states will not of itself do so since use of the internet may automatically give worldwide reach without any intention on the part of the trader to target consumers outside of the state in which it is established.
iii) When considering advertising (whether by the use of the internet or by other media which may reach across borders without any necessary intention to target consumers in other member states) the Court should look for ‘clear expressions of the intention to solicit the custom of that state’s consumers’. Such clear expressions include mention that it is offering its services or its goods in one or more member states designated by name or mention of an international clientele composed of customers domiciled in various states; however, a finding that an activity is ‘directed to’ other member states does not depend solely on the existence of such patent evidence.


V Skouris, P


[2010] EUECJ C-144/09, [2012] Bus LR 972, [2012] All ER (EC) 34, [2011] 2 All ER (Comm) 888, [2010] ECR I-12527




Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 15(1)




OpinionPeter Pammer v Reederei Karl Schluter GmbH and Co KG etc ECJ 18-May-2010
ECJ (Opinion) Regulation No 44/2001 – Article 15, paragraph 1 (c) and 3 – Jurisdiction over consumer contracts – Management of a business to a Member State where the consumer’s home – Accessibility of website – . .

Cited by:

Applied.Oak Leaf Conservatories Ltd v Weir and Another TCC 24-Oct-2013
The claimant conservatory installers claimed wrongful repudiation of the contract by the defendant householders. The defendants, living in Ayrshire, said that the English courts had no jurisdiction over the contract.
Held: The court gave its . .
CitedSoleymani v Nifty Gateway Llc ComC 24-Mar-2022
Arbitration jurisdiction applications stayed
The claimant sought declaratory relief as to the basis of a purchase after he placed a bid for a blockchain-based non-fungible token (also known as an NFT) associated with an artwork by the artist known as Beeple titled ‘Abundance’. The court was . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

European, Jurisdiction, Consumer

Updated: 03 April 2022; Ref: scu.517366