Article 5
1. To the extent that the law applicable to a contract for the carriage of goods has not been chosen in accordance with Article 3, the law applicable shall be the law of the country of habitual residence of the carrier, provided that the place of receipt or the place of delivery or the habitual residence of the consignor is also situated in that country. If those requirements are not met, the law of the country where the place of delivery as agreed by the parties is situated shall apply.
2. To the extent that the law applicable to a contract for the carriage of passengers has not been chosen by the parties in accordance with the second subparagraph, the law applicable shall be the law of the country where the passenger has his habitual residence, provided that either the place of departure or the place of destination is situated in that country. If these requirements are not met, the law of the country where the carrier has his habitual residence shall apply.
The parties may choose as the law applicable to a contract for the carriage of passengers in accordance with Article 3 only the law of the country where:
(a) the passenger has his habitual residence; or
(b) the carrier has his habitual residence; or
(c) the carrier has his place of central administration; or
(d) the place of departure is situated; or
(e) the place of destination is situated.
3. Where it is clear from all the circumstances of the case that the contract, in the absence of a choice of law, is manifestly more closely connected with a country other than that indicated in paragraphs 1 or 2, the law of that other country shall apply.
Verein für Konsumenteninformation v TVP Treuhand- und Verwaltungsgesellschaft für Publikumsfonds mbH & Co KG
A trust agreement under which services owed to a consumer are provided, at a distance from another country, in the country of the consumer's habitual residence does not fall within the exclusion in Article 5(4)(b) of the Rome Convention and Article 6(4)(a) of Regulation No 593/2008.
Verein für Konsumenteninformation v TVP Treuhand- und Verwaltungsgesellschaft für Publikumsfonds mbH & Co KG
A non-negotiated choice-of-law term in a trust agreement between a professional and a consumer for the management of shares in a limited partnership, selecting the law of the Member State of the partnership's seat, is unfair where it gives the consumer the impression that only that law applies and does not inform the consumer that, under Article 5(2) of the Rome Convention and Article 6(2) of Regulation No 593/2008, the consumer also enjoys the protection of the mandatory provisions of the national law that would apply without that term.