On March 7th, 2018 the CJEU delivered its judgement on joined cases C‑274/16, C‑447/16 and C‑448/16, between flightright GmbH and others v Air Nostrum,Líneas Aéreas del Mediterráneo SA v Hainan Airlines Co.Ltd, where it has been stated, inter alia, that, the second indent of Article 5(1)(b) of Regulation No 44/2001 and the second indent of Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) […]
Category: Reg. EU 1215/2012
CJEU Judgment – C‑106/17 – Paweł Hofsoe v LVM Landwirtschaftlicher Versicherungsverein Münster AG – 31 January 2018 – Brussels I bis Regulation – interpretation of Article 11(1)(b) and of Article 13(2) of Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 – concept of ‘injured party’ – high predictability of rules of jurisdiction
On 31 January 2018, the Court of Justice of the European Union issued a judgment in the case C‑106/17 between Paweł Hofsoe and LVM Landwirtschaftlicher Versicherungsverein Münster AG, stating that a natural person, whose professional activity consists, inter alia, in recovering claims for damages from insurers and who relies on a contract for the assignment […]
CJEU Judgment – C-498/16 – Maximilian Schrems v Facebook Ireland Limited – 25 January 2018 – Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 — Articles 15 and 16 — Jurisdiction in respect of consumer contracts — Definition of ‘consumer’ — Assignment between consumers of claims against the same trader or professional)
On 25 January 2018, the Court of Justice of the European Union issued a judgment in the case C-498/16 between Maximilian Schrems and Facebook Ireland Limited, stating on the definition of “consumer” under Articles 15 and 16 of Brussels I. The referring court asks, in essence, (A) whether Article 15 of Regulation No 44/2001 must be interpreted […]
CJEU – Reference for a preliminary ruling – Case C‑649/16 – 20 December 2017 – Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 — Scope — Action for liability in tort against the members of a committee of creditors which rejected a restructuring plan in insolvency proceedings
The Court of Justice of European Union, in Case C‑649/16, on December 20th, 2017 issued a judgment on the scope of the Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012, stating that: Regulations No 1215/2012 and No 1346/2000 must be interpreted in such a way as to avoid any overlap between the rules of law that those instruments lay down and any […]
Koza Ltd & Anor v Akcil & Ors [2017] EWCA Civ 1609 – UK Court of Appeal clarifies approach to exclusive jurisdiction provisions (art. 24(2)) of the Recast Brussels Regulation (1215/2012)) relating to validity of corporate decisions
In the decision rendered in the case Koza Ltd & Anor v Akcil & Ors [2017] EWCA Civ 1609, the Court of Appeal has held that the English courts had exclusive jurisdiction to hear a claim brought by an English subsidiary company against Turkish domiciled defendants including its parent company. The decision confirms that when […]
CJEU Judgment – C 194/16 – 17 October 2017, Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 — Jurisdiction Pursuant Art. 7 (2) — Infringement of the rights of a legal person by the publication on the internet – Place where the damage occurred — Centre of interests of that person
The Court of Justice of the European Union, in Case C‑194/16 of 17 October 2017, issued a judgment concerning the interpretation of Article 7(2) of Regulation (EU) 1215/2012 in relation with internet infringement of personality rights, stating that: a legal person claiming that its personality rights have been infringed by the publication of incorrect information […]
Austrian Supreme Court – Decision 7 July 2017 – N. 6 Ob 18/17s – consumer contracts, Section 4, Artt. 17 and 7 (2) – Brussels I Regulation Recast
by Christian Koller & Laura Kilzer The Austrian Supreme Court has ruled that neither legal claims for damages against a German publicly listed company arising from the violation of capital market obligations nor a shareholder’s claims against the issuer when purchasing shares on the secondary market are subject to the special provisions on jurisdictions regarding consumer […]
Opinion of Advocate General Szpunar – Case C 467/16 – 18 October 2017 – Brigitte Schlömp v. Landratsamt Schwäbisch Hall – Lugano II Convention – Articles 27 and 30 – Lis pendens – Concept of ‘court’
The Advocate General Szpunar, in the Case C-467/16 (Brigitte Schlömp v. Landratsamt Schwäbisch Hall) delivered on 18 October 2017 the following Opinion on Articles 27 and 30 of Lugano II Convention: In the light of the foregoing considerations, I propose to answer the question of the Amtsgericht Stuttgart (Local Court, Stuttgart, Germany) as follows: In a […]
