1. Private International Law
Academic Year 2018/2019
Pietro Franzina –

2. The protection of employees through PIL rules
Brussels I bis
a specialised body of rules within the Regulation, with a protective aim
(1) the jurisdictional opportunities granted to the employee (where he or she is the plaintiff) are broader than those granted to the employer
Article 21(1): an employer domiciled in a MS may be sued: (a) in the courts of that MS; (b) in another MS: (i) in the courts for the place where the employee habitually carries out his work; (ii) if the employee does not habitually carry out his work in any one country, where the business which engaged the employee was situated
Article 22: the employee may only be sued in the MS of his or hr domicile
(2) the personal scope of application of the uniform rules is wider
Article 20(2): a branch in a MS is assimilated to a domicile there
Article 21(3): Article 21(1)(b) also applies to employers domiciled in a non-MS
(3) derogation is only permitted, according to Article 23, by an agreement which
is entered into after the dispute has arisen; or
allows the employee to bring proceedings in courts other than those indicated above

3. The protection of employees through PIL rules
Rome I
a specialised rule (Article 8), with a protective aim
absent a choice of law, the contract is governed by the law of the country where the employee habitually carries out his work; if the law applicable cannot be determined that way, the contract is governed by the law of the country where the place of business through which the employee was engaged is situated
a choice of law under Article 3 is permitted, but that choice may not have the result of depriving the employee of the protection afforded to him by provisions that cannot be derogated from by agreement under the law that would govern the contract in the absence of choice
the employee is further protected through the public policy defence and under the relevant overriding mandatory provisions