Handelswerkerij G.J. Bier B.V. v. Mines de Potasse D'Alsace S.A.
European Union Court of Justice
Case 21/76, [1976] E.C.R. 1736, [1977] 1 C.M.L.R. 284 (1976)
- Written by Curtis Parvin, JD
Facts
Handelswerkerij G.J. Bier B.V. (Bier) (plaintiff) was a Dutch company engaged in a nursery and gardening business in the Netherlands. It used water adjacent to the property, which came from the Rhine River. Due to the high salinity in the water, Bier had to undertake extensive and expensive efforts to alleviate the high salinity to protect its product. Mines de Potasse d’Alsace S.A. (Mines) (defendant), a French company, operated mines in France that discharged high levels of residuary salts into the Rhine as a byproduct of its operations. Bier joined with a foundation established to protect the Rhine’s quality of water, The Reinwater Foundation (Reinwater), and sued Mines in Rotterdam and alleged that Mines’ salty discharge had caused damage to Bier in the form of the extensive and expensive desalination efforts. Mines argued that the Dutch court did not have jurisdiction over it under the Convention of 27 September 1968 on Jurisdiction and the Enforcement of Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters (the convention). The foundation of the convention was jurisdiction in the defendant’s domicile. However, the convention had exceptions for tort matters. Under the convention, a party could be sued on tort matters where “the harmful event occurred.” The Dutch court referred the issue to the European Union Court of Justice for its determination of what that clause meant.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Per curiam)
What to do next…
Here's why 815,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.