Supreme Court of United Kingdom– Deciding the present appeal which relates to the issue as to what connection a foreign company must have with the United Kingdom so as to entitle an English court to wind it up, if its centre of main interests (“COMI”) is in another member state of the European Union, the Court unanimously dismissed the appeal stating that the EU Regulation’s 1346/2000 (Regulation) definition of “establishment”, which must be read as a whole, envisages a fixed place of business and business activity carried on, also consisting in dealings with third parties, and not merely acts of internal administration like in this case. Lord Sumption further noted that where a company has no subsisting business it is clearly not the case that the mere internal administration of its winding up will qualify. Such activity would not be “exercised on the market”; moreover, if it were enough to establish jurisdiction then the requirement for “economic activities” would add little or nothing to the definition of establishment.
As per the facts Olympic Airlines SA was wound up by a court in
Articles 2(h) and 3 of the Regulation were discussed in detail in order to understand the term ‘establishment’. Lastly the Court stated that the respondents were, on the relevant date, only handling matters of internal administration associated with the final stages of the company’s disposal of the means of carrying on business. The company cannot, therefore, be said to have had an “establishment” in the