TNAG-1580-FCO40-2154-Extension-to-Hong-Kong-of-European-Community--European-Free-1987 — Page 27

Joint EEC/EFTA "Exequatur" Working Party

Co-ordination Meeting of EEC Group 8 December 1986

SUMMARY

1. The EEC Group held an inconclusive discussion on Article 16, agreed that there was no need for an Article 17 (6) as proposed by

the EFTA countries and also agreed that Article 27 (4) should not

be amended. There was no development on the issue whether Article 52 (3) should be deleted. The Chairman explained the new

text of Article 57 (3) distributed at the meeting (Annex A). UK position again explained on declarations of extension under Article 64 and this was supported by the Group. The Group also agreed to make no concession on the Swiss demand for an exemption

under Protocol No. 1, Article 1 (the Luxembourg exception).

Inconclusive further discussion of Protocol No. 2 on uniform

judicial interpretation.

DETAIL

Article 16

2.

The Chairman referred to Working Document No. 34 and

indicated that there was as yet no agreement that the lessor should be exclusively a natural person. Spain, France, Greece and Portugal all thought that the exception should be limited to the case where the lessor was a natural person. Germany was more flexible as was Ireland. For the UK I made the point that the use of natural/legal person as a criterion for jurisdiction was imprecise and could lead to twelve different solutions. It would be better to refer to the object of the transaction being for a purpose not connected with a trade or profession. Denmark agreed with this view and France said that it was not hostile to a test

which related to the purpose of the letting.