Cases Private International Law (2024-25)
Mutual trust
Grasser Lis alibi pendens – italian torpedo
Art. 27 B1 : court seized after fitst court should suspend its ruling as
long as the first judge has not ruled on its jurisdiction
Is art. 27 still valid with choise of court clause?
- Yes: even when this means huge delay
Why?
- Principle of mutual trust
Turner No anti-suit injunctions: goes against idea of mutual trust
Starlight Shipping Even quasi-anti suit injunctions (hier : niet echte anti suit, maar
Company buitenlandse (niet-EU) rechterlijke uitspraak die de facto het voeren
van een procedure in de EU zou beperken) ➔ judge “may refuse
recognition”
International
element
Owusu Ongeluk Mr. Owusu (EU onderdaan) in Jamaica – contract voor holiday
villa
How international does the case have to be for EU law to apply?
- Involvement of a MS is enough to trigger regulation, even if the
alternative is a non-EU court
Linder Case was domectic except for nationality: is this enough?
- YES: if there is “a potential” for another court to claim
jurisdiction on the base of nationality
o Hier: defendant was ‘foreign national’ wiens domicilie
op moment van de zaak ‘onbekend’ was ➔ case was
domestic but mere possibility that that de MS where
defendant had his domicile (although this was
unknown) could claim jurisdiction was enough
o Confirms flexible interpretation
Commerzbank For ‘consumer contracts’ ➔ it is sufficient that international element
arises after the conclusion of the contract
- (vooralsnog niet uit te breiden naar situaties buiten
‘beschermde categorie’)
Malectic Illustration of the flexibility of international element (kicks in quite fast)
ZN v. Generalno Confirmation of flexibility (international element kicks in quite fast)
konsultstvo (…)
Vinyls Italia Flexibility also accepted for applicable law (hier dus voor toepassing
Rome I)
SMD v. Banco Is mere choice of court clause enough to trigger B1a?
Santander - Case was removed from register
- Answered Inkreal
Inkreal Pure Slovakian case (both parties domiciled there – non-EU) except for
choice of court clause (Czechia)
, Cases Private International Law (2024-25)
Is this enough?
- YES: under art. 25 – even when there is no tie/connection to a
jurisdiction you can argue upon the choice of court &
applicable law
o Mutual trust
o Predictability
Civil & commercial
Eurocontrol Use of safety services (hier: beheer van luchtverkeer in EU luchtruim –
geen commercieel bedrijf)
Is it public or private?
- Not a C/C matter if public body is exercising its public powers =
acta iure imperii
- Autonomous interpretation (art. 1 should have autonomous
meaning, not dependent on national courts, but first to the
objectives of the conventions & second general principles)
Steenbergen & Both confirmation of Eurocontrol: not a C/C matter if state is acting in
Sonntag exercise of its public powers
- Steenbergen: if state party has certain ‘privileges’ that other
party does nog get = strong indication that’s not a C/C matter
(often procedural privileges)
Sapir When the public body is acting in a private capacity, the case CAN be a
civil & commercial matter
(Hier: niet zo bevonden – ging om vordering tegen
spoorwegmaatschappij die mee hiel bij deportatie tijdens WOII – gezien
als uitoefening staatsmacht)
Fahnenbrock Government action needs to have a ‘direct and immediate effect’ on
the legal relationship; if there is some – even formal - distance ➔ no
acte iure imperii
- Here: dilution of bonds was, although Greek state enacted a
law which obliges banks to do this, it was not really the GR
state buth rather the voting shareholders
Kuhn (later)
Kuhn Similar case to Frahnenbrock: GR OH obligaties en retroactieve wet van
de OH
Court abandons Frahnenbrock by emphasiging the context of the
case: here it was acte iure imperii because the origin of the dispute
stems from the manifestation of a public authority
- Namely: a forced exchange (i.e. replamcement of existing
bonds to lower value) carried out by GR state
Dinant Bar v Maitre Burification possible : between C/C part AND public part
DN
(Brussel I kan gelden voor het privaatrechtelijke gedeelte (bijv.
onrechtmatige daad),maar niet voor het deel waarin de deurwaarder
zijn overheidsbevoegdheden uitoefent (bijv. het organiseren van een
openbare veiling als ambtenaar).
Supreme Site Back to Eurocontrol: neither legal relationships, nor basis and detailed
Services rules of the action show exercise of public powers
Mutual trust
Grasser Lis alibi pendens – italian torpedo
Art. 27 B1 : court seized after fitst court should suspend its ruling as
long as the first judge has not ruled on its jurisdiction
Is art. 27 still valid with choise of court clause?
- Yes: even when this means huge delay
Why?
- Principle of mutual trust
Turner No anti-suit injunctions: goes against idea of mutual trust
Starlight Shipping Even quasi-anti suit injunctions (hier : niet echte anti suit, maar
Company buitenlandse (niet-EU) rechterlijke uitspraak die de facto het voeren
van een procedure in de EU zou beperken) ➔ judge “may refuse
recognition”
International
element
Owusu Ongeluk Mr. Owusu (EU onderdaan) in Jamaica – contract voor holiday
villa
How international does the case have to be for EU law to apply?
- Involvement of a MS is enough to trigger regulation, even if the
alternative is a non-EU court
Linder Case was domectic except for nationality: is this enough?
- YES: if there is “a potential” for another court to claim
jurisdiction on the base of nationality
o Hier: defendant was ‘foreign national’ wiens domicilie
op moment van de zaak ‘onbekend’ was ➔ case was
domestic but mere possibility that that de MS where
defendant had his domicile (although this was
unknown) could claim jurisdiction was enough
o Confirms flexible interpretation
Commerzbank For ‘consumer contracts’ ➔ it is sufficient that international element
arises after the conclusion of the contract
- (vooralsnog niet uit te breiden naar situaties buiten
‘beschermde categorie’)
Malectic Illustration of the flexibility of international element (kicks in quite fast)
ZN v. Generalno Confirmation of flexibility (international element kicks in quite fast)
konsultstvo (…)
Vinyls Italia Flexibility also accepted for applicable law (hier dus voor toepassing
Rome I)
SMD v. Banco Is mere choice of court clause enough to trigger B1a?
Santander - Case was removed from register
- Answered Inkreal
Inkreal Pure Slovakian case (both parties domiciled there – non-EU) except for
choice of court clause (Czechia)
, Cases Private International Law (2024-25)
Is this enough?
- YES: under art. 25 – even when there is no tie/connection to a
jurisdiction you can argue upon the choice of court &
applicable law
o Mutual trust
o Predictability
Civil & commercial
Eurocontrol Use of safety services (hier: beheer van luchtverkeer in EU luchtruim –
geen commercieel bedrijf)
Is it public or private?
- Not a C/C matter if public body is exercising its public powers =
acta iure imperii
- Autonomous interpretation (art. 1 should have autonomous
meaning, not dependent on national courts, but first to the
objectives of the conventions & second general principles)
Steenbergen & Both confirmation of Eurocontrol: not a C/C matter if state is acting in
Sonntag exercise of its public powers
- Steenbergen: if state party has certain ‘privileges’ that other
party does nog get = strong indication that’s not a C/C matter
(often procedural privileges)
Sapir When the public body is acting in a private capacity, the case CAN be a
civil & commercial matter
(Hier: niet zo bevonden – ging om vordering tegen
spoorwegmaatschappij die mee hiel bij deportatie tijdens WOII – gezien
als uitoefening staatsmacht)
Fahnenbrock Government action needs to have a ‘direct and immediate effect’ on
the legal relationship; if there is some – even formal - distance ➔ no
acte iure imperii
- Here: dilution of bonds was, although Greek state enacted a
law which obliges banks to do this, it was not really the GR
state buth rather the voting shareholders
Kuhn (later)
Kuhn Similar case to Frahnenbrock: GR OH obligaties en retroactieve wet van
de OH
Court abandons Frahnenbrock by emphasiging the context of the
case: here it was acte iure imperii because the origin of the dispute
stems from the manifestation of a public authority
- Namely: a forced exchange (i.e. replamcement of existing
bonds to lower value) carried out by GR state
Dinant Bar v Maitre Burification possible : between C/C part AND public part
DN
(Brussel I kan gelden voor het privaatrechtelijke gedeelte (bijv.
onrechtmatige daad),maar niet voor het deel waarin de deurwaarder
zijn overheidsbevoegdheden uitoefent (bijv. het organiseren van een
openbare veiling als ambtenaar).
Supreme Site Back to Eurocontrol: neither legal relationships, nor basis and detailed
Services rules of the action show exercise of public powers
