The courts international juristiction within the European union is regulated by the Brussels I Regulation. Article 2.1 of the Brussels I Regulation contains the fundamental provision. According to this Article the plaintiff shall submit an action where the defandent is domiciled. The Regulation provides exemptions to the this provision in Article 2.1.

The court of the international case can also be determined according to Article 5 (1) of the Brussels I Regulation. This Article contains an alternative to the general provision within Article 2.1. Article 5 (1) is applicable when the dispute is based on an agreement between the parties. The Article is justified because of the close link between the contract and the court of the place where the contract was, or is to be, performed. Article 5 (1) b of the Brussels I Regulation contains a uniform definition of the place of performance, if the agreement consists of contracts for the sale of goods and the provisions of services.

The European Court of Justice in the cases Color Drack, Peter Rehder, Car Trim and Wood Floor interprets the place of performance. In paragraph 18 of the Color Drack-case the ECJ establish that the place of performance shall be “interpreted in the light of the origins, objectives and scheme of that regulation”. The ECJ follows these principles in the interpreting of the cases Peter Rehder, Car Trim and Wood Floor. This essay analyzes the above-mentioned rulings in order to investigate the impact of The ECJ rulings in Car Trim and Wood Floor for the application of Article 5 (1) b of the Brussels I Regulation.